Vogenx, Inc.

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below together with all of the other information contained in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (this “Quarterly Report”) and in the other documents that we file with the SEC, including our unaudited condensed financial statements and related notes appearing in this Quarterly Report, before deciding to invest in our common stock. If any of the events or developments described below were to occur, our business, prospects, operating results and financial condition could suffer materially, the trading price of our common stock could decline and you could lose all or part of your investment. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently believe to be immaterial may also adversely affect our business.

Risks related to financial position and need for capital

Since inception, we have incurred significant operating losses. Our net losses were $5.8 million and $936 thousand for the nine months ended September 30, 2026 and 2025, respectively. As of September 30, 2026, we had an accumulated deficit of $16.6 million. We have financed our operations primarily through the issuance and sale of our common stock, Series A convertible preferred stock, convertible promissory notes and the proceeds from our IPO. Substantially all of our losses have resulted from expenses incurred in connection with our research and development and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations. We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and operating losses for the foreseeable future. Our ability to generate revenue sufficient to achieve profitability will depend heavily on the successful development and eventual commercialization of our current product candidates and potential future product candidates. The net losses we incur may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter. We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially for the foreseeable future if and as we:

As a result, we will need substantial additional funding to support our continuing operations and pursue our growth strategy. Until such time as we can generate significant revenue from product sales, if ever, we expect to finance our operations through the sale of equity, debt, or other capital financing sources, which may include third party collaborations or other strategic transactions. We may be unable to raise additional funds or enter into such other agreements or arrangements when needed on favorable terms, or at all. If we fail to raise capital or enter into such agreements as and when needed, we may have to significantly delay, reduce or eliminate the development and commercialization of product candidates or delay our pursuit of potential in-licenses or acquisitions.

We have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfully complete any pivotal clinical trials, advance any product candidate beyond Phase 2, obtain regulatory approvals, manufacture our product candidates at commercial scale, or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. To become and remain profitable, we must develop and, either directly or through collaborators, eventually commercialize a therapy or therapies with market potential. This will require us to be successful in a range of challenging activities, including completing non-clinical studies and clinical trials of product candidates, obtaining regulatory approval for these product candidates, manufacturing, marketing and selling those therapies for which we may obtain regulatory approval and satisfying any post-marketing requirements. We may never succeed in these activities and, even if we do, may never generate revenues that are significant or large enough to achieve profitability.

Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with developing our technology and our product candidates, we are unable to predict the extent of any future losses or when we will become profitable, if at all. If we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our failure to become and remain profitable would decrease the value of our company and could impair our ability to raise capital, maintain our research and development efforts, expand our business or continue our operations. A decline in the value of our company could also cause you to lose all or part of your investment.

Our ability to generate revenue from product sales and achieve profitability depends on our ability, alone or with collaborative third parties, to successfully complete the development of, and obtain the regulatory approvals necessary to commercialize, our product candidates. We may not generate revenues from product sales for many years, if ever. Our ability to generate future revenues from product sales depends heavily on our or our future collaborators’ ability to successfully:

Our expenses could increase beyond expectations if we are required by the FDA or other regulatory authorities to perform non-clinical studies or clinical trials in addition to those that we currently anticipate. Even if one or more of our product candidates are approved for commercial sale, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercializing any approved product candidate. Additionally, such products may become subject to unfavorable pricing regulations, third-party reimbursement practices or healthcare reform initiatives. Even if we are able to generate revenues from the sale of any approved product candidates, we may not become profitable and may need to obtain additional funding to continue operations.

We will need substantial additional funding. If we are unable to raise additional capital when needed on acceptable terms, or at all, we may be forced to delay, reduce, or terminate certain of our research and product development programs, future commercialization efforts or other operations.

Developing product candidates, including conducting non-clinical studies and clinical trials, is a very time-consuming, expensive and uncertain process that takes years to complete. Our operations have consumed substantial amounts of cash since inception, and we expect our expenses to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we continue the research and development of, continue, initiate and conduct clinical trials of, and seek regulatory approval for, our product candidates. In addition, if we obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to product sales, marketing, manufacturing, and distribution to the extent that such sales, marketing, manufacturing, and distribution are not the responsibility of a collaborator. Other unanticipated costs may also arise. Furthermore, we expect to incur additional costs associated with operating as a public company. Accordingly, we will need to obtain substantial additional funding in connection with our continuing operations. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on acceptable terms, we would be forced to delay, reduce, or eliminate our research and product development programs, future commercialization efforts or other operations.

At September 30, 2026, we had cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities of $82.1 million. We expect that our existing cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities will enable us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements through 2028; provided that prior to commencing a Phase 3 clinical trial for any of our product candidates we will be required to raise substantial additional capital. In addition, our operating plan may change as a result of factors currently unknown to us, and we may need to seek funding sooner than planned. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including:

Identifying potential product candidates and conducting non-clinical testing and clinical trials is a time-consuming, expensive, and uncertain process that takes years to complete, and we may never generate the necessary data or results required to obtain regulatory approval and achieve product sales. In addition, our product candidates, if approved, may not achieve commercial success. Our commercial revenues, if any, will be derived from sales of products that we do not expect to be commercially available for many years, if at all. Accordingly, we will need to continue to rely on additional financing to achieve our business objectives. Adequate additional financing may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. In addition, we may seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, your ownership interest will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect your rights as a common stockholder. Debt financing, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures, declaring dividends, and possibly other restrictions.

Any additional fundraising efforts may divert our management from their day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates. We have no committed sources of additional capital and, if we are unable to raise additional capital in sufficient amounts or on terms acceptable to us, we may have to significantly delay, scale back or discontinue the development or commercialization of our future product candidates or other research and development initiatives. Without sufficient funding, our license agreements and any future collaboration agreements may also be terminated if we are unable to meet the payment or other obligations under such agreements.

If we are unable to raise additional funds through equity or debt financings when needed, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce, or terminate our product development or future commercialization efforts or grant rights to develop and market product candidates that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves. Additionally, if we raise funds through collaborations, strategic alliances, or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our technologies, future revenue streams, research programs, or product candidates, or we may have to grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us and/or that may reduce the value of our common stock.

We are an early-stage company with a limited operating history, have not completed any clinical trials beyond Phase 2 and have no products approved for sale. We commenced our operations in February 2021. Our operations to date have been limited to organizing and staffing our company, business planning, raising capital, and research and development activities such as developing our lead program, mizagliflozin for PBH. We have not yet demonstrated an ability to complete any large-scale, pivotal clinical trials, advance any product candidate beyond Phase 2, obtain regulatory approvals, manufacture our product candidates at commercial scale, arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful commercialization.

Our limited operating history may make it difficult to evaluate our technology and industry and predict our future performance. Our short history as an operating company makes any assessment of our future success or viability subject to significant uncertainty. We will encounter risks and difficulties frequently experienced by very early-stage companies in rapidly evolving fields. If we do not address these risks successfully, our business will suffer.

In addition, we may encounter other unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, and delays in our product development. We will need to transition from a company with a focus on research and conducting clinical trials to a company capable of supporting commercial activities if any of our product candidates are approved. We may not be successful in such a transition.

Since our inception, we have incurred losses and we may never achieve profitability. As of December 31, 2025, we had U.S. federal net operating loss carryforwards of $9.4 million which are not subject to expiration and state net operating loss carryforwards of $9.6 million which expire in various amounts beginning in 2036 through 2041 and $468 thousand of U.S. federal general business credits carryforwards which expire in various amounts beginning in 2041 through 2045. To the extent that we continue to generate taxable losses, under current law, our unused U.S. federal net operating losses (“NOLs”) may be carried forward to offset a portion of future taxable income, if any.

Additionally, we continue to generate business tax credits, including research and development tax credits, which generally may be carried forward to offset a portion of future taxable income, if any, subject to expiration of such credit carryforwards. Under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” generally defined as one or more shareholders or groups of shareholders who own at least 5 percent of the corporation’s equity increasing their equity ownership in the aggregate by more than 50 percentage points (by value) over a three-year period, the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change NOLs and other pre-change tax attributes (such as research and development tax credits) to offset its post-change income or taxes may be limited. Similar rules may apply under state tax laws. To date, we have not completed an analysis under Section 382 of the Code. It is possible that our prior equity offerings and other changes in our stock ownership could have resulted in such ownership changes in the past. In addition, we may experience ownership changes in the future or subsequent shifts in our stock ownership, some of which are outside of our control. As a result, if we earn net taxable income, our ability to use our pre-change NOLs or other pre-change tax attributes to offset U.S. federal taxable income may be subject to limitations, which could potentially result in increased future tax liability to us. There is a risk that due to changes under the tax law, regulatory changes or other unforeseen reasons, our existing NOLs or business tax credits could expire or otherwise be unavailable to offset future income tax liabilities. At the state level, there may also be periods during which the use of NOLs or business tax credits is suspended or otherwise limited, which could accelerate or permanently increase state taxes owed. For these reasons, we may not be able to realize a tax benefit from the use of our NOLs or tax credits, even if we attain profitability.

The rules dealing with U.S. federal, state and local income taxation are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Treasury Department. For example, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (“OBBBA”) was signed into law on July 4, 2025 and made significant changes to U.S. federal tax law. Changes to tax laws (which changes may have retroactive application) could adversely affect our business and our financial condition. For example, under Section 174 of the Code, in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2021, expenses that are incurred for research and development performed outside the U.S. will be capitalized and amortized. The OBBBA provides that for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2024, expenses that are incurred for research and development performed in the U.S. may, at the taxpayer’s election, be immediately deducted or capitalized and amortized. In addition, the OBBBA provides that for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2021 and before January 1, 2025, certain eligible taxpayers generally may elect to retroactively deduct expenses for research and development performed in the U.S. in such taxable years by filing amended tax returns for such taxable years, and all other taxpayers that are not eligible to make such an election and that amortized expenses for research and development performed in the U.S. in such taxable years generally may elect to accelerate and deduct the remaining unamortized amounts of such research and development expenses (i) in the first taxable year beginning after December 31, 2024, or (ii) ratably over the two-taxable year period beginning with the first taxable year beginning after December 31, 2024. In recent years, many such changes have been made and changes are likely to continue to occur in the future. In addition, it is unclear how changes in U.S. federal income tax laws will affect state and local taxation. We cannot predict whether, when, in what form or with what effective dates, tax laws, regulations and rulings may be enacted, promulgated or decided or whether they could increase our or our stockholders’ tax liability or require changes in the manner in which we operate in order to minimize any adverse effects of changes in tax laws or in the interpretation thereof.

Risks related to our business and industry

Our business is highly dependent on the success of our product candidates. If we are unable to successfully complete clinical development, obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize one or more of our product candidates, or if we experience delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.

We are in the early stages of our development efforts and all of our development programs are in the clinical, non-clinical or drug discovery stage. To date, as an organization, we have not completed the development or achieved regulatory approval of any product candidates. Our future success and ability to generate revenue from our product candidates is dependent on our ability to successfully develop, obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize one or more of our product candidates. All of our product candidates will require substantial additional investment for clinical development, regulatory review and approval in one or more jurisdictions. If any of our product candidates encounters safety or efficacy problems, development delays or regulatory issues or other problems, our development plans and business would be materially harmed.

If we fail to discover, develop and commercialize other product candidates, or successfully build out our own internal discovery capacities, we may be unable to grow our business and our ability to achieve our strategic objectives would be impaired.

Although the development and commercialization of mizagliflozin for PBH and mizagliflozin for gastroparesis and the other development candidates in our portfolio are our initial focus, as part of our longer-term growth strategy, we plan to continue to identify additional assets in earlier stages of development and to build fully functional internal discovery capabilities to develop other product candidates. We intend to evaluate internal opportunities from our existing product candidates or other potential product candidates. We have historically relied on the discovery capabilities of our co-founder, Dr. William Wilkison, but we plan to more fully build out our functional internal discovery capabilities, including laboratory space, and internalizing our ability to develop other product candidates. If we are unable to complete this expansion and internalization, we may not be able to add internally-developed product candidates to our pipeline and will have to rely on our existing product candidates, additional product candidates we may in-license or acquire, or additional candidates we may develop through third-party research partners.

We also may choose to in-license or acquire other product candidates to treat patients suffering from other disorders with significant unmet medical needs and limited treatment options. These in-licensed or internally developed potential product candidates will require additional, time-consuming development efforts prior to commercial sale, including non-clinical studies, clinical trials and approval by the FDA and applicable foreign regulatory authorities. All product candidates are prone to the risks of failure that are inherent in pharmaceutical product development, including the possibility that the product candidate will not be shown to be sufficiently safe and effective for approval by regulatory authorities. In addition, we cannot be certain that any such products that are approved will be manufactured or produced economically, successfully commercialized or widely accepted in the marketplace or be more effective than other commercially available alternatives.

These research programs to discover and identify additional product candidates require substantial technical, financial and human resources, whether or not any product candidates are ultimately identified, and all efforts are as of now completed externally as we continue our efforts to internalize certain of our discovery capabilities. Our research programs may initially show promise in identifying potential product candidates, yet fail to yield product candidates for clinical development for many reasons, including the following:

If we are unsuccessful in identifying and developing additional product candidates, either through internal development or licensing or acquisition from third parties, our potential for growth and achieving our strategic objectives may be impaired and we may not be able to increase our revenues in future periods, which could harm our business, results of operations and prospects, and the value of our shares.

We face significant competition in an environment of rapid change, and there is a possibility that our competitors may achieve regulatory approval before us or develop therapies that are safer or more advanced or effective than ours, or that we are unable to compete with existing entities that have made substantial investment into novel treatments for disease, which may harm our financial condition and our ability to successfully market or commercialize any product candidates we may develop.

The development and commercialization of new drug products is highly competitive. We will face competition with respect to our product candidates and any product candidates that we may seek to develop or commercialize in the future from major pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies worldwide. Potential competitors also include academic institutions, government agencies and other public and private research organizations that conduct research, seek patent or other intellectual property protection and establish collaborative arrangements for research, development, manufacturing and commercialization. There are a number of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that currently market and sell products or are pursuing the development of products for the treatment of the disease indications for which we have research programs. Some of these competitive products and therapies may be based on scientific approaches that are the same as or similar to our approach, while others are based on entirely different approaches. Our competitor Amylyx, for example, is developing avexitide, a potential GLP-1 receptor antagonist to mitigate the effects of PBH, which has received Breakthrough Therapy from the FDA. Amylyx initiated a Phase 3 clinical trial in PBH in 2025, announced positive topline results from this trial in August 2026, and has stated that it plans to submit an NDA for avexitide to the FDA by the end of 2026. If avexitide is approved before any of our product candidates, it could become the first FDA-approved treatment for PBH, which could make it more difficult for us to enroll patients in our clinical trials or to commercialize mizagliflozin for PBH, if approved. For more information, see “Business–Competition” included in our IPO Prospectus.

Any product candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize will compete with existing therapies and new therapies that may become available in the future that are approved to treat the same diseases for which we may obtain approval for any product candidates we may develop. This may include various types of therapies, such as small molecule, gene therapies, antisense, antibody and/or protein therapies.

The successful development of pharmaceutical products is highly uncertain.

Successful development of pharmaceutical products is highly uncertain and is dependent on numerous factors, many of which are beyond our control. Product candidates that appear promising in the early phases of development may fail to reach the market for several reasons, including:

The length of time necessary to complete clinical trials and submit an application for marketing approval for a final decision by a regulatory authority varies significantly from one product candidate to the next and from one country or jurisdiction to the next and may be difficult to predict.

Even if we are successful in obtaining marketing approval, commercial success of any approved products will also depend in large part on the availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors, including government payors such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs and managed care organizations in the United States or country-specific governmental organizations in foreign countries, which may be affected by existing and future healthcare reform measures designed to reduce the cost of healthcare. Third-party payors could require us to conduct additional studies, including post-marketing studies related to the cost effectiveness of a product, to qualify for reimbursement, which could be costly and divert our resources. If government and other healthcare payors were not to provide coverage and adequate reimbursement for our products once approved, market acceptance and commercial success would be reduced.

In addition, if any of our product candidates receive marketing approval, we will be subject to significant regulatory obligations regarding the submission of safety and other post-marketing information and reports and registration, and will need to continue to comply (or ensure that our third-party providers comply) with current good manufacturing practices (“cGMPs”), and good clinical practices (“GCPs”), for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval. In addition, there is always the risk that we, a regulatory authority or a third-party might identify previously unknown problems with a product post-approval, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency. Compliance with these requirements is costly, and any failure to comply or other issues with our product candidates post-approval could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

To obtain the requisite regulatory approvals to commercialize any of our product candidates, we must demonstrate through extensive and costly non-clinical studies and clinical trials that our product candidates are safe and effective in humans. We may experience delays in completing our clinical trials or non-clinical studies and initiating or completing additional clinical trials or non-clinical studies, including as a result of regulators not allowing or delay in allowing clinical trials to proceed under an IND, or not approving or delaying approval for any clinical trial grant or similar approval we need to initiate a clinical trial. We may also experience numerous unforeseen events during our clinical trials that could delay or prevent our ability to receive marketing approval or commercialize the product candidates we develop, including:

Our failure to successfully initiate and complete clinical trials and to demonstrate the efficacy and safety necessary to obtain regulatory approval to market our product candidates would significantly harm our business. Our product candidate development costs will also increase if we experience delays in testing or regulatory approvals and we may be required to obtain additional funds to complete clinical trials. We cannot be certain that our clinical trials will begin as planned or be completed on schedule, if at all, or that we will not need to restructure or otherwise modify our trials after they have begun. Significant clinical trial delays also could shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates or allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do and impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates, which may harm our business and results of operations. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, delays of clinical trials may ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates.

We currently have product candidates as well as other programs at various stages of discovery and development. We seek to advance discovery and development for product candidates with an initial focus on metabolic disorders with high unmet need. At present, substantially all of our resources and development efforts are focused on mizagliflozin for the treatment of PBH.

Even if we complete the necessary non-clinical studies and clinical trials, the marketing approval process is expensive, time-consuming and uncertain and may prevent us from obtaining approvals for the commercialization of our product candidates.

The process of obtaining marketing approvals, both in the United States and abroad, is expensive, may take many years if additional clinical trials are required, if approval is obtained at all, and can vary substantially based upon a variety of factors, including the type, complexity, and novelty of the product candidates involved. Changes in marketing approval policies during the development period, changes in or the enactment of additional statutes or regulations, or changes in regulatory review for each submitted product application, may cause delays in the approval or rejection of an application. The FDA and comparable authorities in other countries have substantial discretion in the approval process and may refuse to accept any application or may decide that our data are insufficient for approval and require additional non-clinical, clinical or other studies. In addition, varying interpretations of the data obtained from non-clinical and clinical testing could delay, limit, or prevent marketing approval of a product candidate. Any marketing approval that we may ultimately obtain could be limited or subject to restrictions or post-approval commitments that render the approved product not commercially viable.

Undesirable side effects caused by any of our product candidates could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities.

We may also observe additional safety or tolerability issues with our product candidates in ongoing or future clinical trials. Many compounds that initially showed promise in clinical or earlier-stage testing are later found to cause undesirable or unexpected side effects that prevented further development of the compound. Results of future clinical trials of our product candidates could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of side effects or unexpected characteristics, despite a favorable tolerability profile observed in earlier-stage testing.

If unacceptable side effects arise in the development of our product candidates, we, the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, the IRBs, or independent ethics committees at the institutions in which our trials are conducted, could suspend, limit or terminate our clinical trials, or the independent safety monitoring committee could recommend that we suspend, limit or terminate our trials, or the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could order us to cease clinical trials or deny approval of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. Treatment-emergent side effects that are deemed to be drug-related could delay recruitment of clinical trial subjects or may cause subjects that enroll in our clinical trials to discontinue participation in our clinical trials. In addition, these side effects may not be appropriately recognized or managed by the treating medical staff. We may need to train medical personnel using our product candidates to understand the side effect profiles for our clinical trials and upon any commercialization of any of our product candidates. Inadequate training in recognizing or managing the potential side effects of our product candidates could result in harm to patients that are administered our product candidates. Any of these occurrences may adversely affect our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

If our clinical trials fail to replicate positive results from earlier non-clinical studies or clinical trials conducted by us or third parties, we may be unable to successfully develop, obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize our product candidates.

The results observed from non-clinical studies or early-stage clinical trials of our product candidates may not necessarily be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials that we conduct. Similarly, positive results from such non-clinical studies or early-stage clinical trials may not be replicated in our subsequent non-clinical studies or clinical trials. Furthermore, our product candidates may not be able to demonstrate similar activity or adverse event profiles as other product candidates that we believe may have similar profiles. For example, our future non-clinical or clinical trials for our existing and future product candidates may not continue to demonstrate the similar results that we have seen so far in our product candidates.

In addition, in our planned future clinical trials, we may utilize clinical trial designs or dosing regimens that have not been tested in prior clinical trials.

There can be no assurance that any of our clinical trials will ultimately be successful or support further clinical development of any of our product candidates. There is a high failure rate for drugs proceeding through clinical trials. Many companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in late-stage clinical trials after achieving positive results in early-stage development, and we cannot be certain that we will not face similar setbacks. These setbacks have been caused by, among other things, non-clinical findings made while clinical trials were underway or safety or efficacy observations made in non-clinical studies and clinical trials, including previously unreported adverse events.

Moreover, non-clinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses and many companies that believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in non-clinical studies and clinical trials nonetheless failed to obtain FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority approval.

We may find it difficult to enroll patients in our future clinical trials given the limited number of patients who have the diseases some of our product candidates are intended to target. Additionally, we compete for trial participants with other clinical trials for commercially available products and other competing product candidates that are in the same areas as our product candidates. If we experience delays or difficulties in the enrollment of patients in clinical trials, our clinical development activities and our receipt of necessary regulatory approvals could be delayed or prevented.

As we progress our programs, we may not be able to initiate or continue clinical trials for our product candidates if we are unable to locate and enroll a sufficient number of eligible patients to participate in these trials as required by the FDA or other comparable regulatory authorities outside the United States, or as needed to provide appropriate statistical power for a given trial. In addition, if patients are unwilling to participate in our trials because of negative publicity from adverse events, competitive clinical trials for similar patient populations, clinical trials in competing product candidates or for other reasons, the timeline for recruiting patients, conducting studies and obtaining regulatory approval of our product candidates may be delayed. Moreover, some of our competitors may have ongoing clinical trials for product candidates that would treat the same indications as our product candidates, and patients who would otherwise be eligible for our future clinical trials may instead enroll in clinical trials of our competitors’ product candidates.

Patient enrollment is also affected by other factors, some of which may include:

In addition, if we are unable to enroll a sufficient number of eligible patients in these trials in the United States, we may look to enroll in sites outside of the United States. Our ability to successfully initiate, enroll and complete a clinical trial in any foreign country is subject to numerous risks unique to conducting business in foreign countries, some of which may include:

Enrollment delays in our clinical trials may result in increased development costs for our product candidates, which would cause the value of our company to decline and limit our ability to obtain additional financing. If we or our collaborators have difficulty enrolling a sufficient number of patients to conduct our clinical trials, we may need to delay, limit or terminate ongoing or planned clinical trials or entire clinical programs, any of which would have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

The number of patients with the diseases and disorders for which we are developing our product candidates has not been established with precision. If the actual number of patients with the diseases or disorders we elect to pursue with our product candidates is smaller than we anticipate, we may have difficulties in enrolling patients in our clinical trials, which may delay or prevent development of our product candidates. Even if such product candidates are successfully developed and approved, the markets for our products may be smaller than we expect and our revenue potential and ability to achieve profitability may be materially adversely affected.

Our pipeline includes product candidates for metabolic diseases, with our lead product candidate, mizagliflozin, targeting PBH, gastroparesis, and GIP-dependent Cushing’s Syndrome. There is no precise method of establishing the actual number of patients with any of these disorders in any geography over any time period. With respect to many of the indications in which we have developed, are developing, or plan to develop our product candidates, we have estimates of the prevalence of the disease or disorder. The process we have used in developing an estimated incidence and prevalence for the indications we are targeting has involved collating limited data from multiple sources. Our estimates as to prevalence may not be accurate, and the actual prevalence or addressable patient population for some or all of those indications, or any other indication that we elect to pursue, may be significantly smaller than our estimates. Moreover, the patient population for PBH may decrease due to the development of novel treatments for obesity, reducing the potential need for bariatric surgery, and the patient population for obesity may decrease as novel treatments for obesity are introduced. In estimating the potential prevalence of indications we are pursuing, or may in the future pursue, including our estimates as to the prevalence of PBH and gastroparesis, we apply assumptions to available information that may not prove to be accurate. In each case, there is a range of estimates in the published literature and in marketing studies, which include estimates within the range that are lower than our estimates. The actual number of patients with these disease indications may, however, be significantly lower than we believe. Even if our prevalence estimates are correct, our product candidates may be developed for only a subset of patients with the relevant disease or disorder or our products, if approved, may be indicated for or used by only a subset. In the event the number of patients with the diseases and disorders we are studying is significantly lower than we expect, we may have difficulties enrolling patients in our clinical trials, which may delay or prevent development of our product candidates. If any of our product candidates are approved and our prevalence estimates with respect to any indication or our other market assumptions are not accurate, the markets for our product candidates for these indications may be smaller than we anticipate, which could limit our revenues and our ability to achieve profitability or to meet our expectations with respect to revenues or profits.

We currently have no commercial marketing and sales organization and have no experience as a company in commercializing products, and we may have to invest significant resources to develop these capabilities. If we are unable to establish marketing and sales capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our products, we may not be able to generate product revenue.

Risks related to regulatory, legal, and clinical trials

We are not permitted to commercialize, market, promote or sell any product candidate in the United States without obtaining regulatory approval from the FDA. Foreign regulatory authorities impose similar requirements. The time required to obtain approval by the FDA and comparable foreign authorities is inherently unpredictable, but typically takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and depends upon numerous factors, including substantial discretion of the regulatory authorities. In addition, approval policies, regulations, or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a product candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions. Jurisdictions outside of the United States, such as the European Union or Japan, may have different requirements for regulatory approval, which may require us to conduct additional clinical, non-clinical or chemistry, manufacturing and control studies. To date, we have not submitted an NDA to the FDA or similar drug approval submissions to comparable foreign regulatory authorities for any product candidate. We must complete additional non-clinical studies and clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our product candidates in humans before we will be able to obtain these approvals.

This lengthy approval process as well as the unpredictability of clinical trial results and market exclusivity issues described above may result in our failing to obtain regulatory approval to market any product candidate we develop, which would substantially harm our business, results of operations and prospects. The FDA and other comparable foreign authorities have substantial discretion in the approval process and determining when or whether regulatory approval will be granted for any product candidate that we develop. Even if we believe the data collected from future clinical trials of our product candidates are promising, such data may not be sufficient to support approval by the FDA or any other regulatory authority.

Our product candidates are sensitive to temperature, storage and handling conditions. The handling and administration of the therapy product, if approved, may need to be performed according to specific instructions and in some steps within specific time periods. Failure to correctly handle our product, by us or third parties, could negatively impact the efficacy and/or safety of our product, or cause a loss of product or could in the future lead to additional manufacturing costs and delays in our ability to supply required quantities for commercial supply. For these and other reasons, we may not be able to manufacture our current or future product candidates at commercial scale or in a cost-effective manner. Even if we are able to manufacture and distribute the product candidates, if our products require specific procedures to maintain and use them, we may be limited in commercial opportunity.

The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with our regulatory plan for our product candidates.

The general approach for FDA approval of a new drug is dispositive data from two or more adequate and well-controlled clinical trials of the product candidate in the relevant patient population. Adequate and well-controlled clinical trials typically involve a large number of patients, have significant costs and take years to complete. The FDA or other regulatory authorities may disagree with us about whether a clinical trial is adequate and well-controlled or may request that we conduct additional clinical trials prior to regulatory approval. In addition, there is no assurance that the doses, endpoints and trial designs that we intend to use for our planned clinical trials, including those that we have developed based on feedback from regulatory agencies or those that have been used for the approval of similar drugs, will be acceptable for future approvals.

Our clinical trial results may not support approval of our product candidates. In addition, our product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval, or regulatory approval could be delayed, for many reasons, including the following:

Disruptions at the FDA, other government agencies or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may also slow the time necessary for new drugs to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years, the U.S. government has shut down several times, including in October and November 2025, during which times certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, have had to furlough critical employees and stop critical activities. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs or a widespread freeze on federal funding occurs in the future, including as a result of reaching the debt ceiling, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. Further, government shutdowns could impact our ability to access the public markets and obtain additional capital in the future.

We may in the future conduct clinical trials for drug candidates outside the United States, and the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not accept data from such trials.

We may in the future choose to conduct one or more additional clinical trials outside the United States, including, among other places, in the EU, South America, Australia and/or Asia. The acceptance of study data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States or another jurisdiction by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory 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 basis for regulatory approval in the United States, the FDA will generally not approve the application based on foreign data alone unless: (i) the data is applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice; and (ii) the trials were performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence and pursuant to GCP regulations. Additionally, the FDA’s clinical trial requirements, including sufficient size of patient populations and statistical powering, must be met. 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 comparable foreign regulatory authority will accept data from trials conducted outside of the United States or the applicable jurisdiction. If the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory 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 drug candidates that we may develop not receiving approval for commercialization in such jurisdiction.

Obtaining and maintaining regulatory approval of our product candidates in one jurisdiction does not guarantee that we will be able to obtain or maintain regulatory approval in any other jurisdiction, while a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one jurisdiction may have a negative effect on the regulatory approval process in others. For example, even if the FDA grants marketing approval of a product candidate, comparable foreign regulatory authorities must also approve the manufacturing and marketing of the product candidate in those countries. Approval procedures vary among jurisdictions and can involve requirements and administrative review periods different from, and greater than, those in the United States, including additional non-clinical studies or clinical trials, as clinical trials conducted in one jurisdiction may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions. In many jurisdictions outside the United States, a product candidate must be approved for reimbursement before it can be approved for sale in that jurisdiction. In some cases, the price that we intend to charge for our products is also subject to approval.

While we may in the future seek designations for our product candidates with the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities that are intended to confer benefits such as a faster development process, an accelerated regulatory pathway or regulatory exclusivity, there can be no assurance that we will successfully obtain such designations. In addition, even if one or more of our product candidates are granted such designations, we may not be able to realize the intended benefits of such designations.

For example, we may seek a Fast Track Designation for future product candidates we develop. If a product is intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening condition and non-clinical or clinical data demonstrate the potential to address an unmet medical need for this condition, the product sponsor may apply for Fast Track Designation. The FDA has broad discretion whether or not to grant this designation, so even if we believe a particular product candidate is eligible for this designation, we cannot be certain that the FDA would decide to grant it. Even if we do receive Fast Track Designation, we may not experience a faster development process, review or approval compared to conventional FDA procedures. The FDA may rescind the Fast Track Designation if it believes that the designation is no longer supported by data from our clinical development activities.

We may be unsuccessful in obtaining or may be unable to maintain the benefits associated with Orphan Drug Designation, including the potential for market exclusivity.

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a drug as an orphan drug, referred to as an Orphan Drug Designation, 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 annually in the U.S., or a patient population greater than 200,000 in the U.S. where there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in the U.S. In the U.S., Orphan Drug Designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax advantages and user fee waivers.

Similarly, in the EU, the European Commission (“EC”) grants orphan medicinal product designation after receiving the opinion of the European Medicines Agency’s Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products on an orphan medicinal product designation application. Orphan medicinal product designation is intended to promote the development of medicinal products that are intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of life threatening or chronically debilitating conditions affecting not more than five in 10,000 people in the EU or for products intended for the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of a life threatening, seriously debilitating or serious and chronic condition when, without incentives, it is unlikely that sales of the product in the EU would generate sufficient return to justify the necessary investment in developing the product. In each case, there must be no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention, or treatment authorized for marketing in the EU (or, if such a method exists, the product would be of significant benefit to those affected by the condition). In the EU, orphan medicinal product designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as reduction of fees or fee waivers.

Generally, if a drug with an Orphan Drug Designation subsequently receives the first marketing approval for the indication for which it has such designation, the drug is entitled to a period of marketing exclusivity, which precludes the EC or the FDA from approving another marketing application for the same drug and indication for that time period, except in limited circumstances. The applicable period is seven years in the U.S. and ten years in the EU. The EU exclusivity period can be reduced to six years if a drug no longer meets the criteria for orphan medicinal product designation or if the drug is sufficiently profitable so that market exclusivity is no longer justified.

Even if we obtain orphan drug exclusivity for a drug, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the designated drug from competition because different drugs can be approved for the same condition. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA can subsequently approve the same drug for the same condition if the FDA concludes that the later drug is clinically superior in that it is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care.

Where appropriate, we plan to secure approval from the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities through the use of expedited approval pathways, such as accelerated approval. If we are unable to obtain such approvals, we may be required to conduct additional non-clinical studies or clinical trials beyond those that we contemplate, which could increase the expense of obtaining, and delay the receipt of, necessary marketing approvals. Even if we receive accelerated approval from the FDA or comparable regulatory authorities, if our confirmatory trials do not verify clinical benefit, or if we do not comply with rigorous post-marketing requirements, the FDA or such other regulatory authorities may seek to withdraw the accelerated approval.

Where possible, we plan to pursue accelerated development strategies in areas of high unmet need. We may seek an accelerated approval pathway for one or more of our therapeutic candidates from the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Under the accelerated approval provisions in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and the FDA’s implementing regulations, the FDA may grant accelerated approval to a therapeutic candidate designed to treat a serious or life-threatening condition that provides meaningful therapeutic benefit over available therapies upon a determination that the therapeutic candidate has an effect on a surrogate endpoint or intermediate clinical endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. The FDA considers a clinical benefit to be a positive therapeutic effect that is clinically meaningful in the context of a given disease, such as irreversible morbidity or mortality. For the purposes of accelerated approval, a surrogate endpoint is a marker, such as a laboratory measurement, radiographic image, physical sign, or other measure that is thought to predict clinical benefit, but is not itself a measure of clinical benefit. An intermediate clinical endpoint is a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. The accelerated approval pathway may be used in cases in which the advantage of a new drug over available therapy may not be a direct therapeutic advantage, but is a clinically important improvement from a patient and public health perspective. If granted, accelerated approval is usually contingent on the sponsor’s agreement to conduct, in a diligent manner, additional post-approval confirmatory studies to verify and describe the drug’s clinical benefit. Under the Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act (the “FDORA”), the FDA is permitted to require, as appropriate, that a post-approval confirmatory study or studies be underway prior to approval or within a specified time period after the date of approval for a product granted accelerated approval. FDORA also gives the FDA increased authority to withdraw approval of a drug or biologic granted accelerated approval on an expedited basis if the sponsor fails to conduct such studies in a timely manner, send status updates on such studies to the FDA every 180 days to be publicly posted by the agency, or if such post-approval studies fail to verify the drug’s predicted clinical benefit. The FDA is empowered to take action, such as issuing fines, against companies that fail to conduct with due diligence any post-approval confirmatory study or submit timely reports to the agency on their progress.

Prior to seeking accelerated approval, we would seek feedback from the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities and would otherwise evaluate our ability to seek and receive such accelerated approval. There can be no assurance that after our evaluation of the feedback and other factors we will decide to pursue or submit an NDA or BLA for accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review or approval. Similarly, there can be no assurance that after subsequent feedback from the FDA, or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, we will continue to pursue or apply for accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review or approval, even if we initially decide to do so. Furthermore, if we decide to submit an application for accelerated approval, there can be no assurance that such application will be accepted or that any approval will be granted on a timely basis, or at all. The FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities could also require us to conduct further studies prior to considering our application or granting approval of any type, including, for example, if other products are approved via the accelerated pathway and subsequently converted by FDA to full approval. A failure to obtain accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review or approval for our therapeutic candidate would result in a longer time period to commercialization of such therapeutic candidate, could increase the cost of development of such therapeutic candidate and could harm our competitive position in the marketplace.

It is possible that governmental and enforcement authorities will conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law interpreting applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. Healthcare providers, physicians and third-party payors in the United States and elsewhere play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of pharmaceutical products. Arrangements with third-party payors and customers can expose pharmaceutical manufacturers to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations that may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we conduct research and would sell, market and distribute our products. As a pharmaceutical company, even though we do not and will not control referrals of healthcare services or bill directly to Medicare, Medicaid or other third-party payors, federal and state healthcare laws and regulations that may affect our ability to operate may apply. See the section titled, “Business–Government regulation–Other healthcare laws” included in our IPO Prospectus.

The success of our product candidates, if approved, depends on the availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors. We cannot be sure that coverage and reimbursement will be available for, or accurately estimate the potential revenue from, our product candidates or assure that coverage and reimbursement will be available for any product that we may develop. See the section titled, “Business–Government regulation–Coverage and reimbursement” included in our IPO Prospectus.

In the United States, no uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement for products exists among third-party payors. As a result, obtaining coverage and reimbursement approval of a product from a government or other third-party payor is a time-consuming and costly process that could require us to provide to each payor supporting scientific, clinical and cost-effectiveness data for the use of our products on a payor-by-payor basis, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be obtained. In the United States, the principal decisions about reimbursement for new medicines are typically made by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”). CMS decides whether and to what extent a new medicine will be covered and reimbursed under Medicare and private payors tend to follow CMS to a substantial degree. Even if we obtain coverage for a given product, the resulting reimbursement payment rates might not be adequate for us to achieve or sustain profitability or may require co-payments that patients find unacceptably high. Additionally, third-party payors may not cover, or provide adequate reimbursement for, long-term follow-up evaluations required following the use of product candidates, once approved. Patients are unlikely to use our product candidates, once approved, unless coverage is provided and reimbursement is adequate to cover a significant portion of their cost. There is significant uncertainty related to insurance coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products. It is difficult to predict at this time what third-party payors will decide with respect to the coverage and reimbursement for our product candidates.

In addition, in some foreign countries, the proposed pricing for a drug must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. The requirements governing drug pricing vary widely from country to country. For example, the European Union provides options for its Member States to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval, some of these countries may require the completion of clinical trials that compare the cost effectiveness of a particular product candidate to currently available therapies. A Member State may approve a specific price for the medicinal product or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market. There can be no assurance that any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for pharmaceutical products will allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements for any of our product candidates. Historically, products launched in the European Union do not follow price structures of the United States and generally prices tend to be significantly lower.

Changes in regulations, statutes or the interpretation of existing regulations could impact our business in the future by requiring, for example, (i) changes to our manufacturing arrangements, (ii) additions or modifications to product labeling, (iii) the recall or discontinuation of our products or (iv) additional record-keeping requirements. If any such changes were to be imposed, they could adversely affect the operation of our business. See the sections titled, “Business–Government regulation–Current and future U.S. healthcare reform” included in our IPO Prospectus.

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

Additionally, there has been increasing legislative and enforcement interest in the United States with respect to drug pricing practices, which has resulted in several U.S. Congressional inquiries and federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, reduce the cost of prescription drugs, and review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs. The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (the “IRA”), for example, includes several provisions that may impact our business to varying degrees, including provisions that reduce the out-of-pocket spending cap for Medicare Part D beneficiaries to $2,000, eliminating the prescription drug coverage gap; impose new manufacturer financial liability on certain drugs under Medicare Part D; allow the U.S. government to negotiate Medicare Part B and Part D price caps for certain high-cost drugs and biologics without generic or biosimilar competition; require companies to pay rebates to Medicare for certain drug prices that increase faster than inflation; and delay until January 1, 2032 the implementation of an HHS rebate rule that would have limited the fees that pharmacy benefit managers can charge. Further, under the IRA, orphan drugs were previously exempted from the Medicare drug price negotiation program; however, this exemption was restricted to drugs with only one orphan designation and for which the only approved indication is for that disease or condition. If a product received multiple orphan designations or had multiple approved indications, it would not qualify for the orphan drug exemption. Under the OBBBA, this restriction was eliminated; and effective for the 2028 initial price applicability year, all orphan drugs, regardless of the number of orphan designations or indications, are exempt from the Medicare drug price negotiation program. The effects of the IRA on our business and the healthcare industry in general are not yet known.

On April 15, 2025, the Trump Administration published Executive Order 14273, “Lowering Drug Prices by Once Again Putting Americans First,” which generally directs the federal government to take measures to reduce drug prices, including eliminating the so-called “pill penalty” under the IRA that creates a distinction between small molecule and large molecule products for purposes of determining when a drug may be eligible for drug price negotiation. On May 12, 2025, the Trump Administration published Executive Order 14297, “Delivering Most-Favored-Nation Prescription Drug Pricing to American Patients” which generally, among other things, directs the federal government to establish and communicate most-favored-nation price targets to pharmaceutical manufacturers to bring prices for American patients in line with comparably developed nations. Further, the Executive Order directs the federal government to support regulatory paths to allow direct-to-patient sales for companies that meet these targets. It also states that the Administration will take additional aggressive action (for example, examining whether marketing approvals should be modified or rescinded or opening the door for individual drug importation waivers) should manufacturers fail to offer American consumers the most-favored-nation lowest price. It also directs the Secretary of Commerce and the U.S. Trade Representative to “take all necessary and appropriate action to ensure foreign countries are not engaged in any act, policy, or practice that may be unreasonable or discriminatory or that may impair United States national security . . . including by suppressing the price of pharmaceutical products below fair market value in foreign countries.” Legislative proposals, including the “Most Favored Patient Act’ introduced in March 2026, seek to codify these initiatives. Notably, a similar “Most Favored Nation” pricing rule enacted under the first Trump Administration was subject to an injunction resulting from judicial challenges to the rule, which was formally rescinded by the former Biden Administration in August 2021.

These laws, and any state and federal healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding and otherwise affect the prices we may obtain for any of our product candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval or the frequency with which any such product candidate is prescribed or used.

The ability of the FDA to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and statutory, regulatory, and policy changes. Average review times at the agency have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of 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. Disruptions at the FDA or other government agencies may also slow the time necessary for new drugs to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, have had to furlough critical employees and stop critical activities. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, including as a result of reaching the debt ceiling, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. Further, future government shutdowns could impact our ability to access the public markets and obtain necessary capital in order to properly capitalize and continue our operations.

Failure to access or a significant delay in accessing animal research models may materially adversely affect our ability to advance our non-clinical programs and successfully develop any product candidates, which could result in significant harm to our business.

Consistent with various rules, regulations and cGMP, our ability to advance our non-clinical and clinical programs for our product candidates requires access to animal research models sufficient to assess safety and in some cases to establish the rationale for therapeutic use. Failure to access or a significant delay in accessing animal research models that meet our needs or that fulfill regulatory requirements may materially adversely affect our ability to advance our non-clinical programs and successfully develop any product candidates and this could result in significant harm to our business. During the COVID-19 pandemic, researchers and CROs (including those engaged by us) experienced significant limitations in their access to animal research models, specifically including a sharp reduction in the availability of non-human primates (“NHPs”), originating from breeding farms in Southeast Asia and limited access to the generation of genetically-modified rodent models used in efficacy evaluations. Prior to the pandemic, China was the leading exporter of NHPs employed in basic and applied research; however, early in 2020, China ceased exportation of cynomolgus monkeys, the species most commonly involved in pharmaceutical product development. These restrictions remain in place and global supply continues to be constrained, resulting in increased demand from breeding farms principally located in Cambodia, Vietnam, and Mauritius Island, with a resultant marked increase in unit pricing. Consequently, this has further exacerbated an already constrained NHP supply for research purposes. If we are unable to obtain NHPs in sufficient quantities and in a timely manner to meet the needs of our non-clinical research programs, if the price of NHPs that are available increases significantly, or if our suppliers are unable to ship the NHPs in their possession that are reserved for us, our ability to advance our non-clinical programs and successfully develop any additional non-clinical candidates we may identify may be materially adversely affected or significantly delayed.

Manufacturers and manufacturers’ facilities are required to comply with extensive FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authority requirements, including ensuring that quality control and manufacturing procedures conform to cGMP regulations and applicable product tracking and tracing requirements. As such, we and our contract manufacturers will be subject to continual review and inspections to assess compliance with cGMP and adherence to commitments made in any NDA, other marketing application and previous responses to inspection observations. Accordingly, we and others with whom we work must continue to expend time, money and effort in all areas of regulatory compliance, including manufacturing, production and quality control.

Additionally, under FDORA, sponsors of approved drugs and biologics must provide 6 months’ notice to the FDA of any changes in marketing status, such as the withdrawal of a drug, and failure to do so could result in the FDA placing the product on a list of discontinued products, which would revoke the product’s ability to be marketed. The FDA strictly regulates marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of products that are placed on the market. Products may be promoted only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. If we receive marketing approval for a product candidate, physicians may nevertheless prescribe it to their patients in a manner that is inconsistent with the approval label. If we are found to have promoted such off-label uses, we may become subject to significant liability. The policies of the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. In addition, the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2024 decision to overturn established case law giving deference to regulatory agencies’ interpretations of ambiguous statutory language has introduced uncertainty regarding the extent to which the FDA’s regulations, policies and decisions may become subject to increasing legal challenges, delays, and/or changes. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.

We are subject to export control and import laws and regulations, including the U.S. Export Administration Regulations, U.S. Customs regulations, various economic and trade sanctions regulations administered by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, as amended (the “FCPA”), the U.S. domestic bribery statute contained in 18 U.S.C. § 201, the U.S. Travel Act, the USA PATRIOT Act, and other state and national anti-bribery and anti-money laundering laws in the countries in which we conduct activities. Anti-corruption laws are interpreted broadly and prohibit companies and their employees, agents, contractors, and other collaborators from authorizing, promising, offering, or providing, directly or indirectly, improper payments or anything else of value to recipients in the public or private sector. We may engage third parties to sell our products outside the United States, to conduct clinical trials, and/or to obtain necessary permits, licenses, patent registrations, and other regulatory approvals. We have direct or indirect interactions with officials and employees of government agencies or government-affiliated hospitals, universities, and other organizations. We can be held liable for the corrupt or other illegal activities of our employees, agents, contractors, and other collaborators, even if we do not explicitly authorize or have actual knowledge of such activities. Any violations of the laws and regulations described above may result in substantial civil and criminal fines and penalties, imprisonment, the loss of export or import privileges, debarment, tax reassessments, breach of contract and fraud litigation, reputational harm, and other consequences.

We and any contract manufacturers and suppliers we engage are subject to numerous federal, state, and local environmental, health, and safety laws, regulations, and permitting requirements, including those governing laboratory procedures; the generation, handling, use, storage, treatment, and disposal of hazardous and regulated materials and wastes; the emission and discharge of hazardous materials into the ground, air, and water; and employee health and safety. We cannot eliminate the risk of contamination or injury from hazardous materials, including chemical and biological materials. In the event of contamination or injury resulting from our use of hazardous materials, we could be held liable for any resulting damages, and any liability could exceed our resources. Under certain environmental laws, we could be held responsible for costs relating to any contamination at our current or past facilities and at third-party facilities. We also could incur significant costs associated with civil or criminal fines and penalties.

We are exposed to the risk of fraud or other misconduct by our employees, consultants, commercial partners and, principal investigators. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional failures to comply with FDA regulations and other jurisdictions, provide accurate information to the FDA and other regulatory authorities, comply with healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations in the United States and abroad, report financial information or data accurately or disclose unauthorized activities to us. In particular, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, misconduct, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Such misconduct also could involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical trials or interactions with the FDA or other regulatory authorities, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation. We are also exposed to risks in connection with any insider trading violations by employees or others affiliated with us. We have adopted a code of conduct and an insider trading policy applicable to all of our employees, but it is not always possible to identify and deter employee misconduct, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from government investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with these laws or regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects, including the imposition of significant fines or other sanctions.

Product liability lawsuits against us could cause us to incur substantial liabilities and could limit commercialization of any product candidates that we may develop.

We will face an inherent risk of product liability exposure related to the testing of our product candidates in human clinical trials and will face an even greater risk if we commercially sell such product candidates. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against claims that our product candidates caused injuries, we could incur substantial liabilities. Regardless of merit or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:

We anticipate that we will need to increase our insurance coverage as we conduct additional clinical trials and if we successfully commercialize any product candidate. Insurance coverage is increasingly expensive. We may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in an amount adequate to satisfy any liability that may arise.

Our internal computer and information technology systems, or those of our third-party vendors, collaborators, contractors, consultants or other third parties, may fail, become unavailable, or suffer security incidents, compromises, or data breaches, loss or leakage of data and other disruptions, which could result in a material disruption of our product development programs, compromise confidential, sensitive or personal information related to our business or prevent us from accessing critical information, potentially exposing us to liability or otherwise adversely affecting our business.

Our internal computer and information technology systems and those of our current and any future third-party vendors, collaborators, contractors, consultants or other third parties, are vulnerable to damage or interruption from, among other things, computer viruses, computer hackers, phishing attacks, ransomware, malware, social engineering, service interruptions, system malfunction, malicious code, employee theft, fraud, misconduct or misuse, denial-of-service attacks, sophisticated nation-state and nation-state-supported actors, unauthorized access, natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures. While we seek to protect our information technology systems from system failure, accident and security breach, we have in the past and may in the future experience phishing and other security incidents which could result in a disruption of our development programs and our business operations, whether due to a loss of our trade secrets or other proprietary, personal or confidential information or other disruptions. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from clinical trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data.

While we have implemented cybersecurity measures designed to protect our information technology systems as well as the confidential and sensitive data in our possession, there can be no assurance that these measures will be adequate to detect, prevent, or adequately address any cybersecurity incident or data breach that we may face. Controls employed by our information technology department and other third parties could prove inadequate, and our ability to monitor such third parties’ data security practices is limited. Due to applicable laws, rules, regulations and standards or contractual obligations, we may be held responsible for any information security failure or cybersecurity incident or compromise attributed to our third-party vendors as they relate to the information we share with them.

If we were to experience a cybersecurity incident, breach, compromise or other security event relating to our information systems or data, the costs, time and effort associated with the investigation, remediation and potential notification of the breach to counterparties, regulators and data subjects could be material. We may incur significant costs in an effort to detect and prevent security incidents or compromises, and we may face increased costs and requirements to expend substantial resources in the event of an actual or perceived security incident or compromise. In addition, techniques used to sabotage or to obtain unauthorized access to networks in which data is stored or through which data is transmitted change frequently, become more complex over time and generally are not recognized until launched against a target. The risk of a cybersecurity breach, incident, compromise or disruption, particularly through cyberattacks including supply chain attacks or cyber intrusion, including by computer hackers, foreign governments, and cyber terrorists, has generally increased as the number, intensity, and sophistication of attempted attacks and intrusions from around the world have increased. As a result, we and our third-party vendors may be unable to anticipate these techniques or implement adequate preventative measures quickly enough to prevent either an electronic intrusion into our systems or services or a compromise of critical information. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to detect or prevent any such incidents, and, our remediation efforts may not be successful or timely. Our efforts to improve our cybersecurity and protect data from compromise may also identify previously undiscovered instances of data breaches, compromises or other cybersecurity incidents. If we do not allocate and effectively manage the resources necessary to build and sustain the proper technology and cybersecurity infrastructure, we could suffer significant business disruption, including transaction errors, supply chain or manufacturing interruptions, processing inefficiencies, data loss or the loss of or damage to intellectual property or other proprietary, personal or confidential information. Although we currently maintain cybersecurity insurance, the insurance we maintain against the risk of this type of loss may not be sufficient to cover actual losses, or may not apply to the circumstances relating to any particular loss.

To the extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in a loss of, or damage to, our or our third-party vendors’, collaborators’, contractors’, employees’, consultants’ or other third parties’ data, including personal data, or applications or inappropriate disclosure, loss, destruction or alteration of, or access to, confidential, personal or proprietary information, we could incur significant liability including litigation exposure, substantial penalties and fines, we could become the subject of regulatory action, inquiry or investigation, our competitive position could be harmed, we could incur significant reputational damage and the further development and commercialization of any product candidates we may develop could be delayed. Any of the above could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects.

Laws and regulations governing any international operations we may have in the future may preclude us from developing, manufacturing and selling certain product candidates we may identify outside of the United States and require us to develop and implement costly compliance programs.

We will be subject to numerous laws and regulations in each jurisdiction outside the United States in which we operate in the future. The creation, implementation and maintenance of international business practices compliance programs is costly and such programs are difficult to enforce, particularly where reliance on third parties is required.

Similarly, the U.K. Bribery Act 2010 has extra-territorial effect for companies and individuals having a connection with the United Kingdom. The U.K. Bribery Act prohibits inducements both to public officials and private individuals and organizations. Compliance with the FCPA and the U.K. Bribery Act is expensive and difficult, particularly in countries in which corruption is a recognized problem. In addition, the FCPA presents particular challenges in the pharmaceutical industry, because, in many countries, hospitals are operated by the government, and doctors and other hospital employees are considered foreign officials. Certain payments to hospitals in connection with clinical trials and other work have been deemed to be improper payments to government officials and have led to FCPA enforcement actions.

Various laws, regulations and executive orders also restrict the use and dissemination outside of the United States, or the sharing with certain non-U.S. nationals, of information classified for national security purposes, as well as certain products and technical data relating to those products. Any expansion outside of the United States would require us to dedicate additional resources to comply with these laws, and these laws may preclude us from developing, manufacturing or selling certain drugs and drug candidates outside of the United States, which could limit our growth potential and increase our development costs. The failure to comply with laws governing international business practices may result in substantial penalties, including suspension or debarment from government contracting. Violation of the FCPA can result in significant civil and criminal penalties. Indictment alone under the FCPA can lead to suspension of the right to do business with the U.S. government until the pending claims are resolved. Conviction of a violation of the FCPA can result in long-term disqualification as a government contractor. The termination of a government contract or relationship as a result of our failure to satisfy any of our obligations under laws governing international business practices would have a negative impact on our operations and harm our reputation and ability to procure government contracts. The SEC also may suspend or bar issuers from trading securities on U.S. exchanges for violations of the FCPA’s accounting provisions.

Significant political, trade and regulatory developments, and other circumstances beyond our control, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.

We may in the future operate and, if approved, sell our products outside of the United States. Significant political, trade, or regulatory developments in the jurisdictions in which we may sell our products, such as those stemming from any changes in the U.S. federal administration, are difficult to predict and may have a material adverse effect on us. Similarly, changes in U.S. federal policy that affect the geopolitical landscape could give rise to circumstances outside our control that could have negative impacts on our business operations. For example, in 2025, the United States imposed tariffs on imports on its trading partners, including Canada, Mexico, the EU and China. On April 2, 2026, President Trump issued a proclamation under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, following the completion of the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Section 232 investigation into the national security implications of pharmaceutical and active pharmaceutical ingredients (API) imports, imposing a 100% ad valorem tariff on imports of patented pharmaceutical products and associated pharmaceutical ingredients, including APIs. For the large pharmaceutical companies identified in the proclamation, the tariffs became effective on July 31, 2026; for all other importers, the tariffs became effective on September 29, 2026. The proclamation provides for reduced or zero tariff rates in certain circumstances, including exemptions for generic pharmaceuticals, U.S.-origin products, and certain specialty products, such as drugs for which all approved indications carry orphan drug designation under the Orphan Drug Act, subject to specified conditions. We do not have in-house manufacturing capability and depend on a limited number of third-party manufacturers and API formulators, certain of which are located outside the U.S. or source APIs, raw materials, laboratory equipment and research material and components from other countries. To the extent the new tariffs apply to our products or their inputs and are not subject to an exemption or reduced rate, they could increase our costs and reduce our margins. Historically, tariffs have led to increased trade and political tensions. In response to tariffs, other countries have implemented retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods. Political tensions as a result of trade policies could reduce trade volume, investment, technological exchange and other economic activities between major international economies, resulting in a material adverse effect on global economic conditions and the stability of global financial markets. Any changes in political, trade, regulatory, and economic conditions, including U.S. trade policies, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.

We are subject to stringent and often unsettled laws, rules, regulations, policies, standards and contractual obligations related to data privacy and security and changes in such laws, rules, regulations, policies, standards and contractual obligations could adversely affect our business.

We are subject to data privacy and protection laws, rules, regulations, policies, standards and contractual obligations that apply to the collection, transmission, storage, use, disclosure, transfer, maintenance and other processing of sensitive, personal and personally-identifying information, which, among other things, impose certain requirements relating to the privacy, security, transmission and other processing of personal information. The legislative and regulatory landscape for privacy and data protection continues to evolve in jurisdictions worldwide, and there has been an increasing focus on privacy and data protection issues with the potential to affect our business. However, our data privacy program is in its early stages and we have not yet assessed the applicability of and our compliance with data privacy-related laws, rules and regulations. As a result, we cannot guarantee that we are and have been in compliance with all applicable data privacy and protection laws, rules, regulations, policies and standards, and we may need to expend significant resources to implement privacy compliance measures. Additionally, we rely on certain third-party vendors to process certain confidential, sensitive or personal information on our behalf. Failure by us or our third-party vendors to comply with any of these laws, rules, regulations, contractual obligations or standards could result in notification obligations, enforcement actions, regulatory investigations or inquiries, significant fines, imprisonment of company officials and public censure, litigation and claims for damages by affected individuals, customers or business partners, damage to our reputation and loss of goodwill, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects.

There are numerous U.S. federal and state laws, rules and regulations related to the privacy and security of personal information. In particular, regulations promulgated pursuant to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”), establish privacy and security standards that limit the use and disclosure of individually identifiable health information, or protected health information, and require the implementation of administrative, physical and technological safeguards to protect the privacy of protected health information and ensure the confidentiality, integrity and availability of electronic protected health information. Further, the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 clarified that genetic information is protected under HIPAA and restricts the use and disclosure of genetic information.

Additionally, laws in all 50 states require businesses to provide notice to customers whose personally identifiable information has been disclosed as a result of a cybersecurity incident or data breach. These laws are not consistent, and compliance in the event of a widespread cybersecurity incident or data breach is difficult and may be costly. Moreover, states have been frequently amending existing laws, requiring attention to changing regulatory requirements. We also may be contractually required to notify patients or other counterparties of a cybersecurity breach, incident, or compromise. Although we may have contractual protections with our service providers, any actual or perceived security breach, cybersecurity incident, or other information system compromise could harm our reputation and brand, expose us to potential liability or require us to expend significant resources on data security and in responding to any such actual or perceived breach, incident, or compromise. Any contractual protections we may have from our service providers may not be sufficient to adequately protect us from any such liabilities and losses, and we may be unable to enforce any such contractual protections. In addition to government regulation, privacy advocates and industry groups have and may in the future propose self-regulatory information technology system standards from time to time. These and other industry standards may legally or contractually apply to us, or we may elect to comply with such standards. Determining whether personal information has been handled in compliance with applicable privacy standards and our contractual obligations can be complex and may be subject to changing interpretation.

If we are unable to properly protect the privacy and security of personal information, we could be alleged or actually found to have breached our contracts. Furthermore, if we fail to comply with applicable privacy laws, we could face significant administrative, civil and criminal penalties. We cannot be sure how these laws, rules and regulations will be interpreted, enforced or applied to our operations. In addition to the risks associated with enforcement activities and potential contractual liabilities, our ongoing efforts to comply with evolving laws, rules and regulations at the international, federal and state level may be costly and require ongoing modifications to our policies, procedures and systems.

We make public statements about our use, collection, disclosure and other processing of personal information through our privacy policies and information provided on our website. Although we endeavor to comply with our public statements and documentation, we may at times fail to do so or be alleged to have failed to do so. The publication of our privacy policies and other statements that provide promises and assurances about data privacy and security can subject us to potential government or legal action if they are found to be deceptive, unfair or misrepresentative of our actual practices.

Data privacy remains an evolving landscape at both the domestic and international level, with new laws, rules and regulations coming into effect and continued legal challenges. At the state level, numerous states have enacted or are in the process of enacting or considering comprehensive data privacy and security laws, rules and regulations while other states have focused on more narrow aspects of privacy. For example, in California, the California Consumer Privacy Act (the “CCPA”), which came into effect on January 1, 2020, established a comprehensive privacy framework for covered businesses by creating an expanded definition of personal information, providing new data privacy rights for consumers and imposing new operational requirements for companies. The CCPA required covered companies to provide certain disclosures to consumers about their data collection, use and sharing practices, and to provide affected California residents with ways to opt-out of certain sales or transfers of personal information. In particular, the CCPA gave California residents expanded rights to access and delete their personal information, opt out of certain personal information sharing, and to receive detailed information about how their personal information is used. Laws similar to the CCPA have been passed or proposed in numerous other states, including Colorado, Virginia, Utah, Connecticut, New Jersey, New Hampshire and more. Such laws add complexity, vary requirements, restrictions and potential legal risk, require additional investment of resources in compliance programs, impact strategies and the availability of previously useful data and could result in increased compliance costs and/or changes in business practices and policies.

Several states are also specifically regulating health information. For example, Washington state passed a health privacy law that will regulate the collection and sharing of health information, and the law also has a private right of action, which further increases the relevant compliance risk. Connecticut and Nevada have also passed similar laws regulating consumer health data. In addition, other states have proposed and/or passed legislation that regulates the privacy and/or security of certain specific types of information. For example, a number of states have passed laws that regulate biometric data specifically. These various privacy and security laws may impact our business activities, including our identification of research subjects, relationships with business partners and ultimately the marketing and distribution of our products. State laws are changing rapidly and there is discussion in the U.S. Congress of comprehensive federal data privacy laws to which we may likely become subject, if enacted. The existence of different privacy laws in various jurisdictions in the country would make our compliance obligations more complex and costly and may increase the likelihood that we may be subject to enforcement actions or otherwise incur liability for noncompliance. Although many of the existing state privacy laws exempt clinical trial information and health information governed by HIPAA, future privacy and data protection laws may be broader in scope.

To the extent that these laws are or become applicable, all of these evolving compliance and operational requirements may impose significant costs, such as costs related to organizational changes, implementing additional protection technologies, training employees and engaging consultants and legal advisors, which are likely to increase over time. In addition, such requirements may require us to modify our data processing practices and policies, utilize management’s time and/or divert resources from other initiatives and projects. Our efforts to comply with these evolving data protection laws, rules and regulations may be unsuccessful. It is possible that these laws, rules and regulations may be interpreted and applied in a manner that is inconsistent with our practices and our efforts to comply with the evolving data protection rules may be unsuccessful. The laws are also not always consistent with each other, and compliance in the event of a widespread cybersecurity incident or data breach is costly and time-consuming. States are also frequently amending existing laws, requiring attention to frequently changing regulatory requirements. We must devote significant resources to understanding and complying with this changing landscape.

Any failure or perceived failure by us or our third-party vendors to comply with laws, rules and regulations regarding data privacy and protection could result in damage to our reputation or expose us to risk of enforcement actions taken by data protection authorities and/or other third parties, including class action privacy litigation in certain jurisdictions, which carry the potential for significant penalties if we are found to be non-compliant. Similarly, failure to comply with federal and state laws, rules and regulations in the United States regarding privacy and security of personal information could expose us to penalties under such laws, rules and regulations. Any such failure, or perceived failure, by us or our third-party vendors to comply with data protection and privacy laws, rules and regulations could result in significant government-imposed fines or orders requiring that we change our practices, claims for damages or other liabilities, regulatory investigations and enforcement action, litigation and significant costs for remediation, any of which could adversely affect our business. Even if we are not determined to have violated these laws, rules or regulations, government investigations into these issues typically require the expenditure of significant resources and generate negative publicity, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

The use of new and evolving technologies, such as artificial intelligence (“AI”), in our operations may require us to expend material resources and may present risks and challenges that can impact our business including by posing security and other risks to our confidential information, proprietary information and personal information, any of which may result in reputational harm and liability, or otherwise adversely affect our business.

We may choose to integrate AI into our operations, and this innovation presents risks and challenges that could affect its adoption, and therefore our business. There are significant risks involved in utilizing AI and no assurance can be provided that the usage of AI will enhance our business or assist our business in becoming more efficient or profitable. The use of certain AI technology can give rise to intellectual property risks, including compromises to proprietary intellectual property and intellectual property infringement and misappropriation. Other known risks of AI currently include inaccuracy, bias, toxicity, data privacy and cybersecurity issues, and data provenance disputes. In addition, AI may have errors or inadequacies that are not easily detectable. AI may also be subject to data herding and interconnectedness (i.e., multiple market participants utilizing the same data), which may adversely impact our business. If the data used to train AI or the content, analyses, or recommendations that AI applications assist in producing are or are alleged to be deficient, inaccurate, incomplete, overbroad or biased, our business, financial condition, and results of operations may be adversely affected. Additionally, we expect to see increasing government and supranational regulation and ethical concerns related to AI use which may also significantly increase the burden and cost of research, development and compliance in this area. For example, the EU began implementing the Artificial Intelligence Act on August 1, 2024, and a significant part of the law came into effect in August 2026. This legislation imposes significant obligations on providers and deployers of high risk AI systems, and encourages providers and deployers of AI systems to account for certain ethical principles in their design, development and use of these systems. The rapid evolution of AI will require the application of significant resources to design, develop, test and maintain our technology and products to help ensure that AI is implemented in accordance with applicable laws and regulations and in a socially responsible manner and to minimize any real or perceived unintended harmful impacts. The legal landscape and subsequent legal protection for the use of AI remains uncertain, and development of the law in this area could impact our ability to enforce our proprietary rights or protect against infringing uses. If we do not have sufficient rights to use the data on which AI relies or to the outputs produced by AI applications, we may incur liability through the violation of certain laws, third-party privacy or other rights or contracts to which we are a party. Our use of AI applications may also, in the future, result in cybersecurity incidents or data breaches that implicate the personal data of customers or patients. Any such cybersecurity incidents or data breaches related to our use of AI applications could adversely affect our reputation and results of operations.

Our vendors may also incorporate AI tools into their own offerings, and the providers of these AI tools may not meet existing or rapidly evolving regulatory or industry standards, including with respect to intellectual property, privacy and data security. Further, bad actors around the world use increasingly sophisticated methods, including the use of AI, to engage in illegal activities involving the theft and misuse of personal information, confidential information and intellectual property. Any of these effects could damage our reputation, result in the loss of valuable property and information, cause us to breach applicable laws and regulations, and adversely impact our business.

Risks related to third-party relationships

We are reliant on a license agreement with Kissei Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.

We are reliant on a license agreement with Kissei Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (“Kissei”) pursuant to which we have been granted a royalty-bearing license for the exclusive global rights (excluding Korea, Taiwan, and Japan) under certain Kissei patent rights and know-how covering mizagliflozin in the treatment, palliation or prevention of human disease, including but not limited to PBH, constipation, irritable bowel syndrome and dumping syndrome. The license agreement with Kissei (the “Kissei License Agreement”) may be terminated under certain conditions. Termination of the Kissei License Agreement or reduction or elimination of our licensed rights thereunder may require us to negotiate new or reinstated licenses with less favorable terms or to cease all development and commercialization of our product candidates containing mizagliflozin. If any such events were to occur, they could have a material adverse effect on our business prospects, financial condition and results of operations. For more information, see “Business—Kissei License Agreement” included in our IPO Prospectus.

We are dependent on third parties having accurately generated, collected, interpreted and reported data from certain non-clinical studies and clinical trials that were previously conducted for our product candidates.

We have relied on third parties, including Kissei, to conduct certain non-clinical studies and clinical trials. Therefore, we are dependent on these third parties having conducted their research and development in accordance with the applicable protocols, legal and regulatory requirements, and scientific standards; having accurately reported the results of all non-clinical studies and clinical trials conducted with respect to such product candidates and having correctly collected and interpreted the data from these studies and trials. These risks also apply to any additional product candidates that we may acquire or in-license in the future. If these activities were not compliant, accurate or correct, the clinical development, regulatory approval or commercialization of our product candidates will be adversely affected.

If conflicts arise between us and any current or future licensor, collaborator or corporate or strategic partner, these parties may act in a manner adverse to us and could limit our ability to implement our strategies.

If conflicts arise between us and any current or future licensor, collaborator or corporate or strategic partners, the other party may act in a manner adverse to us and could limit our ability to implement our strategies. Some of these licensors, collaborators, and corporate and strategic partners may conduct multiple product development efforts within each area that is the subject of their respective agreements with us. In addition, these licensors, collaborators, and corporate and strategic partners may develop, either alone or with others, products in related fields that are competitive with the product candidates we may develop that are the subject of their respective agreements with us. Competing products, either developed by our licensors, collaborators, or corporate or strategic partners or to which such parties have rights, may result in the withdrawal of or diminishment of support for any product candidates we may develop.

Additionally, some of our collaborators or strategic partners could also become our competitors in the future. Our current or future licensors, collaborators, or corporate or strategic partners could develop competing products, preclude us from entering into collaborations with their competitors, fail to obtain timely regulatory approvals, prevent us from obtaining timely regulatory approvals, terminate their agreements with us prematurely or fail to devote sufficient resources to the collaboration efforts, including development, delivery, manufacturing and commercialization of products. Any of these developments could harm our company and product development efforts.

The advancement of our product candidates and development programs and the potential commercialization of our current and future product candidates will require substantial additional cash to fund expenses. For some of our programs, we may decide to collaborate with other pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies with respect to development and potential commercialization. Potential collaborators may include large and mid-size pharmaceutical companies, regional and national pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies. In addition, if we are able to obtain regulatory approval for product candidates from foreign regulatory authorities, we may enter into collaborations with international biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies for the commercialization of such product candidates.

Collaborations are complex and time-consuming to negotiate and document. External market factors such as business combinations among large pharmaceutical companies may result in a reduced number of potential future collaborators. Any collaboration agreements that we enter into in the future may contain restrictions on our ability to enter into potential collaborations or to otherwise develop specified product candidates. We may not be able to negotiate collaborations on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to do so, we may have to curtail the development of the product candidate for which we are seeking to collaborate, reduce or delay its development program or one or more of our other development programs, delay its potential commercialization or reduce the scope of any sales or marketing activities, or increase our expenditures and undertake development or commercialization activities at our own expense. Further, any failure to successfully develop or commercialize our product candidates pursuant to any future collaboration agreements could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We have relied upon and plan to continue to rely on third parties, such as CROs, clinical data management organizations, medical institutions and clinical investigators, to conduct our clinical trials and expect to rely on these third parties to conduct clinical trials of any other product candidate that we develop. Our ability to complete clinical trials in a timely fashion depends on a number of key factors. These factors include protocol design, regulatory and IRB approval, patient enrollment rates and compliance with GCPs. We have contracted with clinical trial sites and may in the future enroll patients in a number of countries where our experience is limited. In most cases, we use the services of third parties, including CROs, to carry out our clinical trial-related activities and rely on such parties to accurately report their results. Our reliance on third parties for clinical development activities may impact or limit our control over the timing, conduct, expense and quality of our clinical trials. Moreover, the FDA requires us to comply with GCPs for conducting, recording and reporting the results of clinical trials to assure that data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of trial participants are protected. The FDA enforces these GCPs through periodic inspections of clinical trial sponsors, principal investigators, clinical trial sites and IRBs. For certain commercial prescription drug products, manufacturers and other parties involved in the supply chain must also meet chain of distribution requirements and build electronic, interoperable systems for product tracking and tracing and for notifying the FDA of counterfeit, diverted, stolen and intentionally adulterated products or other products that are otherwise unfit for distribution in the United States.

Furthermore, the third parties conducting clinical trials on our behalf are not our employees, and except for remedies available to us under our agreements with such contractors, we cannot control whether or not they devote sufficient time, skill and resources to our ongoing development programs. Moreover, many CROs, including some of those that we have engaged to conduct our clinical trials, are experiencing enrollment challenges as a result of, among other things, high employee turnover driven by the post-COVID macroeconomic environment and the inexperience of new employees. Furthermore, at clinical trial sites, the availability of staff and trial participants has been limited due to a decrease in the number of clinical investigative sites across the globe. These contractors may also have relationships with other commercial entities, including our competitors, for whom they may also be conducting clinical trials or other drug development activities, which could impede their ability to devote appropriate time to our clinical programs. If these third parties, including clinical investigators, do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines or conduct our clinical trials in accordance with regulatory requirements or our stated protocols, we may not be able to obtain, or may be delayed in obtaining, regulatory approvals for our product candidates. If that occurs, we will not be able to, or may be delayed in our efforts to, successfully commercialize our product candidates. In such an event, our financial results and the commercial prospects for any product candidates that we seek to develop could be harmed, our costs could increase and our ability to generate revenues could be delayed, impaired or foreclosed.

Any of the third-party organizations we utilize may terminate their engagements with us under certain circumstances. The replacement of an existing CRO or other third party may result in the delay of the affected trials or otherwise adversely affect our efforts to obtain regulatory approvals and commercialize our product candidates. For example, although we believe there are a number of other CROs we could engage, we may not be able to enter into alternative arrangements or do so on commercially reasonable terms. In addition, while we believe there may be suitable replacements for one or more of these service providers, there is a natural transition period when a new service provider begins work. As a result, delays may occur, which could negatively impact our ability to meet our expected clinical development timelines and harm our business, financial condition and prospects.

As product candidates proceed through development to late-stage clinical trials towards potential approval and commercialization, it is common that various aspects of the development program, such as the vendors used to manufacture drug product or manufacturing methods and formulation, are altered along the way in an effort to optimize processes and results. Such changes carry the risk that they will not achieve these intended objectives. Any of these changes could cause our product candidates to perform differently and affect the results of planned clinical trials or other future clinical trials conducted with the materials manufactured using altered processes. Such changes may also require additional testing, FDA notification or FDA approval. Moreover, if the formulation of our product candidates requires the use of delivery methods such as cold-chain distribution provided by third parties, whereby the product must be maintained between specified temperatures, we will be subject to reliance on our distribution partners to maintain the temperature of the formulation or else risk it being adulterated and rendered unusable. Any of the above could delay or prevent completion of clinical trials, require conducting bridging clinical trials or the repetition of one or more clinical trials, increase clinical trial costs, delay or prevent approval of our product candidates and jeopardize our ability to commence sales and generate revenue.

Our use of third parties to manufacture our product candidates may increase the risk that we will not have sufficient quantities of our product candidates, raw materials, APIs, or drug products when needed or at an acceptable cost.

We do not own or operate manufacturing facilities for the production of clinical or commercial quantities of our product candidates, and we lack the resources and the capabilities to do so. Our current strategy is to outsource all manufacturing of our product candidates to third parties.

We currently rely on and engage third-party manufacturers to provide all of the API and the final drug product formulation of all of our product candidates that are being used in our clinical trials and non-clinical studies. In the event that any of our product candidates are approved, we will be required to engage one or more new third-party manufacturers for our products. Although we believe that there are several potential alternative manufacturers who could manufacture our product candidates, we may incur added costs and delays in identifying and qualifying any such replacement. In addition, we typically order raw materials, API and drug product and services on a purchase order basis and do not enter into long-term dedicated capacity or minimum supply arrangements with any commercial manufacturer. We may not be able to timely secure needed supply arrangements on satisfactory terms, or at all. Our failure to secure these arrangements as needed could have a material adverse effect on our ability to complete the development of our product candidates or to commercialize them, if approved. We may be unable to conclude agreements for commercial supply with third-party manufacturers or may be unable to do so on acceptable terms. There may be difficulties in scaling up to commercial quantities and formulation of our product candidates, and the costs of manufacturing could be prohibitive.

If our manufacturers have difficulty or suffer delays in successfully manufacturing material that meets our specifications, it may limit supply of our product candidates and could delay our clinical trials. Even if we are able to establish and maintain arrangements with third-party manufacturers, reliance on third-party manufacturers entails additional risks, including:

Some of our manufacturers may be located outside of the United States. There is currently significant uncertainty about the future relationship between the United States and various other countries, including China and India, with respect to trade policies, treaties, government regulations and tariffs. Increased tariffs (including tariffs that have been or may in the future be imposed by the U.S. or other countries) could potentially disrupt our existing supply chains and impose additional costs on our business. Additionally, it is possible further tariffs may be imposed that could affect imports of APIs used in our product candidates, or our business may be adversely impacted by retaliatory trade measures taken by China, India, or other countries, including restricted access to such raw materials used in our product candidates. Given the unpredictable regulatory environment and uncertainty regarding how the U.S. or foreign governments will act with respect to tariffs, international trade agreements and policies, further governmental action related to tariffs, additional taxes, regulatory changes or other retaliatory trade measures in the future could occur with a corresponding detrimental impact on our business and financial condition.

Our failure, or the failure of our third-party manufacturers, to comply with applicable regulations could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including clinical holds, fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, seizures or voluntary recalls of product candidates, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly affect supplies of our product candidates. The facilities used by our contract manufacturers to manufacture our product candidates must be evaluated by the FDA. We do not control the manufacturing process of, and are completely dependent on, our contract manufacturing partners for compliance with cGMPs. If our contract manufacturers cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the strict regulatory requirements of the FDA or others, we may not be able to secure and/or maintain regulatory approval for our product candidates manufactured at these facilities. In addition, we have no control over the ability of our contract manufacturers to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel. If the FDA finds deficiencies or a comparable foreign regulatory authority does not approve these facilities for the manufacture of our product candidates or if it withdraws any such approval in the future, we may need to find alternative manufacturing facilities, which would significantly impact our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for or market our product candidates, if approved. Contract manufacturers may face manufacturing or quality control problems causing drug substance production and shipment delays or a situation where the contractor may not be able to maintain compliance with the applicable cGMP requirements. Any failure to comply with cGMP requirements or other FDA and comparable foreign regulatory requirements could adversely affect our clinical research activities and our ability to develop our product candidates and market our products, if approved.

The FDA and other foreign regulatory authorities require manufacturers to register manufacturing facilities. The FDA and corresponding foreign regulators also inspect these facilities to confirm compliance with cGMPs.

We may need to maintain licenses for APIs from third parties to develop and commercialize some of our product candidates, which could increase our development costs and delay our ability to commercialize those product candidates.

Should we decide to use any APIs in any of our product candidates that are proprietary to one or more third parties, we would need to maintain licenses to those APIs from those third parties. If we are unable to gain or continue to access rights to these APIs prior to conducting non-clinical toxicology studies intended to support clinical trials, we may need to develop alternate product candidates from these programs by either accessing or developing alternate APIs, resulting in increased development costs and delays in commercialization of these product candidates. If we are unable to gain or maintain continued access rights to the desired APIs on commercially reasonable terms or develop suitable alternate APIs, we may not be able to commercialize product candidates from these programs.

Risks related to personnel, operations, and growth

Our success depends in part on our continued ability to attract, retain and motivate highly qualified management, clinical and scientific personnel. We are highly dependent upon our senior management, including our Chief Executive Officer, as well as our Chief Scientific Officer and other members of our senior management team. The loss of services of any of these individuals could delay or prevent the successful development of our product pipeline, initiation or completion of our planned clinical trials or the commercialization of our product candidates. Although we have executed employment agreements with each member of our senior management team, these agreements are terminable at will with notice and, therefore, we may not be able to retain their services as expected. We do not currently maintain “key person” life insurance on the lives of our executives or any of our employees. This lack of insurance means that we may not have adequate compensation for the loss of the services of these individuals.

We will need to significantly increase the size of our organization and we may have difficulties in managing our growth and expanding our operations successfully.

As of September 30, 2026, we had seven full-time employees and two part-time employees and are in the process of building out our team to support our operations. As we advance our products and product candidates through the development and commercialization process, we will need to expand managerial, operational, financial, sales and marketing and other resources to manage our operations, non-clinical and clinical trials, research and development activities, regulatory filings, manufacturing and supply activities, and any marketing and commercialization activities or contract with other organizations to provide these capabilities for us. As operations expand, we expect that we will need to manage additional relationships with various suppliers and other organizations. Our ability to manage our operations and growth requires us to continue to improve our operational, financial and management controls, reporting systems and procedures across a global organization. Such growth could place a strain on our administrative and operational infrastructure. Due to our limited financial resources and the limited experience of our management team in managing a company with such anticipated growth and with developing sales, marketing and distribution infrastructure, we may not be able to effectively manage the expansion of our operations or recruit and train additional qualified personnel. If we are not able to effectively manage growth and expand our operations, we may not be able to successfully implement the tasks necessary to further develop and commercialize, if approved, any product candidates and, accordingly, we may not achieve our research, development and commercialization goals.

Further, we may not be successful in maintaining our unique company culture and continuing to attract or retain qualified management and scientific and clinical personnel in the future due to the intense competition for qualified personnel among pharmaceutical, biotechnology and other businesses. Our industry has experienced a high rate of turnover of management personnel in recent years.

Additionally, we may not be able to make improvements to our management information and control systems in an efficient or timely manner and may discover deficiencies in existing systems and controls. Our management, personnel, systems and facilities currently in place may not be adequate to support this future growth. Our need to effectively execute our growth strategy requires that we either internally, together with collaboration partners or through third-party contractors, as applicable:

If we are not able to attract, retain and motivate necessary personnel to accomplish our business objectives, we may experience constraints that will significantly impede the achievement of our development objectives, our ability to raise additional capital and our ability to implement our business strategy.

Risks related to our intellectual property

Our commercial success depends on our ability to obtain, maintain, enforce, and otherwise protect our intellectual property and proprietary technology, and if the scope of the intellectual property protection obtained is not sufficiently broad, our competitors or other third parties could develop and commercialize products and product candidates similar to ours and our ability to successfully develop and commercialize our product candidates may be adversely affected.

Our commercial success depends, in large part, on our ability to obtain and maintain intellectual property rights protection through patents, trademarks, and trade secrets in the United States and other countries with respect to our technology and product candidates. If we do not adequately protect our intellectual property rights, competitors or other third parties may be able to erode, negate or preempt any competitive advantage we may have, which could harm our business and ability to achieve profitability. To protect our proprietary position, we have filed patent applications and may file other patent applications in the United States or abroad related to our product candidates that are important to our business; we also license and may purchase patents or patent applications filed by others. In particular, we are heavily reliant on patent rights we have exclusively licensed from Kissei pursuant to the Kissei License Agreement. The patent prosecution process is expensive, time-consuming and complex. We may not be able to file, prosecute, maintain, enforce or license all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. Our in-licensed patent portfolio pursuant to the Kissei License Agreement includes three international patent families, which, collectively, contain four granted U.S. patents and 32 granted foreign patents related to mizagliflozin with expected expiry dates in 2028, 2029, and 2033. We also own one patent in the United States, three patents in Indonesia, Mexico, and China, respectively, and four pending patent applications in Brazil, Canada, the European Patent Office, and India, respectively, relating to mizagliflozin compositions and methods for treating postprandial hypoglycemia, with expected expiry dates in 2039. In addition, we own one patent in the United States, three patents in Mexico, India, and China, respectively, and three patent applications in Brazil, Canada, and the European Patent Office, respectively, relating to our VGX-2857 product candidate, with expected expiry dates in 2040. We also have three additional patent applications pending in the United States, China, and the European Patent Office, respectively, relating to compositions and methods for treating hyperinsulinemic hypoglycemia, with expected expiry dates in 2044, not including any patent term adjustment or patent term extensions that may be available, and two pending international PCT patent applications that relate to compositions and methods for treating GIP-dependent Cushing’s Syndrome and gastroparesis, respectively. Patents issuing from national phase applications of the PCT applications will have expected expiry dates in 2044, not including any patent term adjustment or patent term extensions that may be available. Pending patent applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technology claimed in such applications unless and until a patent issues from such applications.

If the scope of the patent protection we obtain, or, as applicable, which our licensor(s) obtain, is not sufficiently broad in terms of scope of claims and/or geographic reach, we may not be able to prevent others from developing and commercializing technology and products similar or identical to ours. The degree of patent protection we require to successfully compete in the marketplace may be unavailable or severely limited in some cases and may not adequately protect our rights or permit us to gain or keep any competitive advantage. We cannot provide any assurances that any of our licensed patents have, or that any of our owned pending patent applications that mature into issued patents will include claims with a scope sufficient to protect our product candidates or otherwise provide any competitive advantage. Other parties have developed or may develop technologies that may be related or competitive with our approach, and may have filed or may file patent applications and may have been issued or may be issued patents with claims that overlap or conflict with our patent portfolio, either by claiming the same compounds, formulations or methods or by claiming subject matter that could dominate our patent position. In addition, the laws of foreign countries may not protect our rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States. Furthermore, patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years after it is filed. Various extensions may be available; however, the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of product candidates, patents protecting such product candidates might expire before or shortly after such product candidates are commercialized. As a result, our patent portfolio may not provide us with adequate and continuing patent protection sufficient to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.

Even if they are unchallenged, our owned and licensed patents and pending patent applications, if issued, may not provide us with any meaningful protection or prevent competitors from designing around our patent claims to circumvent our patent portfolio by developing similar or alternative product candidates in a non-infringing manner. For example, a third party may develop a product candidate that provides benefits similar to one of our product candidates but falls outside the scope of our patent protection or license rights. If the patent protection provided by the patent and patent applications we hold or pursue with respect to such product candidate is not sufficiently broad to impede such competition, our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidate could be negatively affected, which would harm our business.

It is possible that defects of form in the preparation or filing of our patent portfolio may exist, or may arise in the future, for example with respect to proper priority claims, inventorship, claim scope, or requests for patent term adjustments. If we or our partners, collaborators, or licensees whether current or future, fail to establish, maintain or protect such patents and other intellectual property rights, such rights may be reduced or eliminated. If our partners, collaborators, or licensees are not fully cooperative or disagree with us as to the prosecution, maintenance or enforcement of any patent rights, such patent rights could be compromised. If there are material defects in the form, preparation, prosecution, or enforcement of our patent portfolio, such patents may be invalid and/or unenforceable, and such applications may never result in valid, enforceable patents. Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other government fees on patents and/or applications will be due to be paid to the USPTO and various government patent agencies outside of the United States over the lifetime of our owned or licensed patents and patent applications. We rely on our outside counsel or our licensing partners to pay these fees due to U.S. and non-U.S. patent agencies. The USPTO and various non-U.S. government patent agencies require compliance with several procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. While an inadvertent lapse can, in many cases, be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which non-compliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Non-compliant events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application include, but are not limited to, failure to respond to official actions within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents. Any of these outcomes could impair our ability to prevent competition from third parties, which may have an adverse impact on our business.

The patent position of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies carries uncertainty. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patent rights are characterized by uncertainty.

Pending patent applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technology claimed in such applications unless and until a patent issues from such applications. Assuming the other requirements for patentability are met, currently, the first to file a patent application is generally entitled to the patent. Publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and nonprovisional patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions are not published until 18 months after their priority filing dates, or, in some cases, not at all. Therefore, we cannot be certain that we were the first to make the inventions claimed in our patent portfolio, or that we were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions. If third parties have filed such prior applications after March 15, 2013, a derivation proceeding in the United States can be initiated by such third parties to determine whether our invention was derived from theirs.

Moreover, because the issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, any patents we may own or license may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad. There is no assurance that all the potentially relevant prior art relating to our patent portfolio has been found. Publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and nonprovisional patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after their earliest priority filing dates or, in some cases, not at all. Therefore, we cannot know with certainty whether we were the first to make the inventions claimed in our patent portfolio, or that we were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions. If such prior art exists, it may be used to invalidate a patent, or may prevent a patent from issuing from a pending patent application. For example, such patent filings may be subject to a third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO, or to other patent offices around the world. Alternately or additionally, we may become involved in post-grant review procedures, oppositions, derivation proceedings,ex parte reexaminations,inter partes reviews, supplemental examinations, or interference proceedings or challenges before the USPTO or in district court in the United States, or similar proceedings in various foreign jurisdictions, including both national and regional, challenging patents or patent applications in which we have rights, including patents on which we rely to protect our business. An adverse determination in any such challenges may result in loss of the patent or claims in the patent portfolio being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, or in denial of the patent application or loss or reduction in the scope of one or more claims of the patent portfolio, any of which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our technology and products.

Our or our licensors’ pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued that protect our business, in whole or in part, or which effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive products. Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States and other countries also may diminish the value of our patents or narrow the scope of our patent protection. In addition, the laws of foreign countries may not protect our rights to the same extent or in the same manner as the laws of the United States. For example, patent laws in various jurisdictions, including jurisdictions covering significant commercial markets, such as Europe, China, and Japan, generally restrict the patentability of methods of treatment of the human body more than United States law does. If these developments were to occur, they could have a material adverse effect on our ability to generate revenue.

Issued patents that we may own or license may not provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent competitors from competing with us or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. Our competitors may be able to circumvent our patents by developing similar or alternative technologies or products in a non-infringing manner. Our competitors may also seek approval to market their own products similar to or otherwise competitive with our products. In these circumstances, we may need to defend or assert our patents, or both, including by filing lawsuits alleging patent infringement. In any of these types of proceedings, a court or other agency with jurisdiction may find our patents invalid or unenforceable, or that our competitors do not infringe our patents. Thus, even if we have valid and enforceable patents, these patents still may not provide protection against competing products or processes sufficient to achieve our business objectives.

We maintain certain information as company trade secrets. This information may relate to inventions that are not patentable or not optimally protected with patents. We use commercially reasonable practices to protect this information, including, for example, limiting access to the information and requiring passwords for our computers. Additionally, we execute confidentiality agreements with any third parties to whom we may provide access to the information and with our employees, consultants, scientific advisors, collaborators, vendors, contractors, and advisors. We cannot provide any assurances that all such agreements have been duly executed, and third parties may still obtain this information or may come upon this or similar information independently. It is possible that technology relevant to our business will be independently developed by a person who is not a party to such a confidentiality or invention assignment agreement. If any of our trade secrets were to be independently developed by a competitor or other third party, we would have no right to prevent such competitor or third party, or those to whom they communicate such independently developed information, from using that information to compete with us. We may not be able to prevent the unauthorized disclosure or use of our technical knowledge or trade secrets by contract manufacturers, consultants, collaborators, vendors, advisors, former employees and current employees. Monitoring unauthorized uses and disclosures is difficult and we do not know whether the steps we have taken to protect our proprietary technologies will be effective. Furthermore, if the parties to our confidentiality agreements breach or violate the terms of these agreements, we may not have adequate remedies for any such breach or violation, and we could lose our trade secrets as a consequence of such breaches or violations. Our trade secrets could otherwise become known or be independently discovered by our competitors. Additionally, if the steps taken to maintain our trade secrets are deemed inadequate, we may have insufficient recourse against third parties for misappropriating our trade secrets. If any of these events occurs or if we otherwise lose protection for our trade secrets, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be materially and adversely harmed.

If we fail to comply with our obligations in the agreements under which we license intellectual property rights from third parties or otherwise experience disruptions to our business relationships with our current and future licensors, we could lose license rights that are important to our business.

We are heavily reliant upon the Kissei License Agreement. Termination of the Kissei License Agreement with respect to our lead product candidate, mizagliflozin, or reduction or elimination of our licensed rights could lead to the loss of our ability to develop and commercialize our proprietary technology and product candidates. Further development of our product candidates may require us to enter into additional license or collaboration agreements. Our future licenses may not provide us with exclusive rights to use the licensed intellectual property and technology, or may not provide us with exclusive rights to use such intellectual property and technology in all relevant fields of use and in all territories in which we may wish to develop or commercialize our product candidates and proprietary technology in the future. Additionally, the Kissei License Agreement imposes, and future agreements may impose, various development, diligence, commercialization and other obligations on us, including requirements to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop, market and commercialize licensed products in order to maintain the licenses. Similarly, any future agreements we may enter into could impose comparable obligations, including meeting specific development timelines to maintain the licenses.

Despite our best efforts, our current or future licensors might conclude that we materially breached our license agreements and might therefore terminate the license agreements, thereby removing our ability to develop and commercialize products, if approved, and technology covered by these license agreements. As a result, we may be required to cease our development and commercialization of our product candidates and use of our proprietary technologies covered by the patent rights owned by the licensors. Furthermore, if the in-licensed patent rights fail to provide the intended exclusivity, competitors will have the freedom to seek regulatory approval of, and to market, products identical to ours. These events could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

The patent positions of pharmaceutical, biotechnology and other life sciences companies can be highly uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions for which important legal principles remain unresolved and have in recent years been the subject of much litigation. Changes in either the patent laws or in interpretations of patent laws in the United States and other countries may diminish the value of our intellectual property. Further, the determination that a patent application or patent claim meets all the requirements for patentability is a subjective determination based on the application of law and jurisprudence. The ultimate determination by the USPTO or by a court or other trier of fact in the United States, or corresponding foreign national patent offices or courts, on whether a claim meets all requirements of patentability cannot be assured. Although we have conducted searches for third-party publications, patents and other information that may affect the patentability of claims in our patent portfolio, we cannot be certain that all relevant information has been identified. Accordingly, we cannot predict the breadth of claims that may be allowed or enforced in our own patent portfolio.

Although we have exclusively in-licensed issued patents relating to our mizagliflozin product candidate and we own issued patents in the U.S., Indonesia, Mexico ,India and China and patent applications in the U.S, Brazil, Canada, Indonesia and the European Patent Office and India relating to our mizagliflozin product candidate, we cannot provide assurances that any of our patent applications will be found to be patentable, including over our own prior art publications or patent literature, or will issue as patents. Neither can we make assurances as to the scope of any claims that may issue from our pending and future patent applications nor to the outcome of any proceedings by any potential third parties that could challenge the patentability, validity or enforceability of our patent portfolio in the United States or foreign jurisdictions. Any such challenge, if successful, could limit patent protection for our product candidates and/or materially harm our business.

Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States and most foreign jurisdictions, if all maintenance fees are timely paid, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from its earliest non-provisional filing date. The patent term of a U.S. patent may be lengthened by patent term adjustment, which compensates a patentee for administrative delays by the United States Patent and Trademark Office in granting a patent, or may be shortened if a patent is terminally disclaimed over another commonly owned patent having an earlier expiration date.

The granting of such patent term extensions is not guaranteed and is subject to numerous requirements. We might not be granted an extension because of, for example, failure to apply within applicable periods, failure to apply prior to the expiration of relevant patents, failure to exercise due diligence during the testing phase or regulatory review process or any other failure to satisfy any of the numerous applicable requirements. In addition, to the extent we wish to pursue patent term extension based on a patent that we in-license from a third party, we would need the cooperation of that third party. Moreover, 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 this occurs, our competitors may be able to obtain approval of competing products following our patent expiration by referencing our clinical and non-clinical data and launch their product earlier than might otherwise be the case. If this were to occur, it could have a material adverse effect on our ability to generate revenue.

The United States Congress is responsible for passing laws establishing patentability standards. As with any laws, implementation is left to federal agencies and the federal courts based on their interpretations of the laws. Interpretation of patent standards can vary significantly within the USPTO, and across the various federal courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court. Recently, the Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases, generally limiting the types of inventions that can be patented. Further, there are open questions regarding interpretation of patentability standards that the Supreme Court has yet to decisively address. Absent clear guidance from the Supreme Court, the USPTO has become increasingly conservative in its interpretation of patent laws and standards.

In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, the legal landscape in the U.S. has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents. Depending on any actions by Congress, and future decisions by the lower federal courts and the U.S. Supreme Court, along with interpretations by the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways and could weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future.

Depending on future actions by the U.S. Congress, the U.S. courts, the USPTO and the relevant law-making bodies in other countries, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years; these cases often narrow the scope of patent protection available to inventions in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical spaces. In 2022, Congress passed the IRA, which authorizes the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) to negotiate prices directly with participating manufacturers for selected medicines covered by Medicare even if these medicines are protected by an existing patent. For small molecule medicines, the process begins seven years after initial approval by the FDA. While we do not believe that the IRA or its effects will impact our ability to obtain patents in the near future, we cannot be certain that it will not affect our patent strategy in the long run.

Further, a new court system recently became operational in the European Union. The Unified Patent Court (“UPC”) began accepting patent cases on June 1, 2023. The UPC is a common patent court with jurisdiction over patent infringement and revocation proceedings effective for multiple member states of the European Union. The broad geographic reach of the UPC could enable third parties to seek revocation of any of our European patents in a single proceeding at the UPC rather than through multiple proceedings in each of the individual European Union member states in which the European patent is validated. Under the UPC, a successful revocation proceeding for a European Patent under the UPC would result in loss of patent protection in those European Union countries. Accordingly, a single proceeding under the UPC could result in the partial or complete loss of patent protection in numerous European Union countries. Such a loss of patent protection could have a material adverse impact on our business and our ability to commercialize our technology and product candidates and, resultantly, on our business, financial condition, prospects and results of operations. Moreover, the controlling laws and regulations of the UPC will develop over time and we cannot predict what the outcomes of cases tried before the UPC will be. The case law of the UPC may adversely affect our ability to enforce or defend the validity of our European patents. Patent owners have the option to opt-out their European Patents from the jurisdiction of the UPC, defaulting to pre-UPC enforcement mechanisms. We have decided to opt out certain European patents and patent applications from the UPC. However, if certain formalities and requirements are not met, our European patents could be subject to the jurisdiction of the UPC. We cannot be certain that our European patents will avoid falling under the jurisdiction of the UPC, if we decide to opt out of the UPC.

Filing, prosecuting, enforcing, and defending patents protecting our product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States can be less extensive than those in the United States. The requirements for patentability may differ in certain countries, particularly in developing countries; thus, even in countries where we do pursue patent protection, there can be no assurance that any patents will issue with claims that cover our products.

Proceedings to enforce our patent rights, whether successful or not, could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and resources from other aspects of our business. Further, such proceedings could put our patents at risk of being invalidated, held unenforceable or interpreted narrowly; put our pending patent applications at risk of not issuing; and provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful.

Furthermore, while we intend to protect our intellectual property rights in major markets for our products, we cannot ensure that we will be able to initiate or maintain similar efforts in all jurisdictions in which we may wish to market our products, if approved. Accordingly, our efforts to protect our intellectual property rights in such countries may be inadequate.

In order to protect our competitive position around our product candidates, we may become involved in lawsuits to enforce our patents or other intellectual property, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful and which may result in our patents being found invalid or unenforceable.

Concurrently with an infringement litigation, third parties may also be able to challenge the validity of our patents before administrative bodies in the United States or abroad. Such mechanisms include re-examination, post grant review and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions, e.g., opposition proceedings. Such proceedings could result in revocation or amendment of our patents in such a way that they no longer cover our products, potentially negatively impacting any concurrent litigation.

If we are sued for infringing intellectual property rights of third parties, such litigation could be costly and time-consuming and could prevent or delay us from developing or commercializing our product candidates.

Our commercial success depends, in part, on our ability to develop, manufacture, market and sell our product candidates without infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating the intellectual property and other proprietary rights of third parties. However, our research, development and commercialization activities may be subject to claims that we infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate patents or other intellectual property rights owned or controlled by third parties. Third parties may have U.S. and non-U.S. issued patents and pending patent applications relating to compounds, methods of manufacturing compounds and/or methods of use for the treatment of the disease indications for which we are developing our product candidates. If any third-party patents or patent applications are found to cover our product candidates, or their methods of use or manufacture, we may not be free to manufacture or market such product candidates as planned without obtaining a license, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all.

While we perform periodic searches for relevant patents and patent applications with respect to our product candidates, including mizagliflozin for PBH and gastroparesis, we cannot guarantee the completeness or thoroughness of any of our patent searches or analyses including, but not limited to, the identification of relevant patents, the scope of patent claims or the expiration of relevant patents, nor can we be certain that we have identified each and every patent and pending application in the United States and abroad that is relevant to or necessary for the commercialization of any of our product candidates in any jurisdiction. Patent applications in the United States and elsewhere are typically published approximately 18 months after the earliest filing for which priority is claimed, with such earliest filing date being commonly referred to as the priority date. Certain U.S. applications that will not be filed outside the U.S. can remain confidential until patents issue. As a result, we may be unable to identify such patents or patent applications despite our best efforts. In addition, because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending patent applications which may later result in issued patents that any of our product candidates may be accused of infringing. In addition, third parties may obtain patents in the future and claim that use of our technologies infringes upon these patents. Accordingly, third parties may assert infringement claims against us based on intellectual property rights that exist now or arise in the future. The outcome of intellectual property litigation is subject to uncertainties that cannot be adequately quantified in advance. The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have produced a significant number of patents, and it may not always be clear to industry participants, including us, which patents cover various types of products or methods of use or manufacture. The scope of protection afforded by a patent is subject to interpretation by the courts, and the interpretation is not always uniform. If we were sued for patent infringement, we would need to demonstrate that the relevant product or methods of using the product either do not infringe the patent claims of the relevant patent or that the patent claims are invalid or unenforceable, and we may not be able to do this. Proving invalidity is difficult. For example, in the United States, proving invalidity requires a showing of clear and convincing evidence to overcome the presumption of validity enjoyed by issued patents. Even if we are successful in these proceedings, we may incur substantial costs and the time and attention of our management and scientific personnel could be diverted in pursuing these proceedings, which could significantly harm our business and operating results. In addition, parties making claims against us may be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation more effectively than we can because they have substantially greater resources, and we may not have sufficient resources to bring these actions to a successful conclusion.

If we are found to infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate a third party’s intellectual property rights, we could be forced, including by court order, to cease developing, manufacturing or commercializing the infringing product. Alternatively, we may be required to obtain a license from such third party in order to use the infringing technology and continue developing, manufacturing or marketing the infringing product. If we were required to obtain a license to continue to manufacture or market the affected product, we may be required to pay substantial royalties or grant cross-licenses to our patents. Even if we were able to obtain a license, it could be nonexclusive, thereby giving our competitors and other third parties access to the same technologies licensed to us. We cannot be certain that any such license will be available on acceptable terms, if at all. Ultimately, we could be prevented from commercializing a product, or be forced to cease some aspect of our business operations as a result of claims of patent infringement or violation of other intellectual property rights. Further, the outcome of intellectual property litigation is subject to uncertainties that cannot be adequately quantified in advance, including the demeanor and credibility of witnesses and the identity of any adverse party. This is especially true in intellectual property cases that may turn on the testimony of experts as to technical facts upon which experts may reasonably disagree. Furthermore, 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 access to the same technologies licensed to us; alternatively or additionally it could include terms that impede or destroy our ability to compete successfully in the commercial marketplace. In addition, we could be found liable for significant monetary damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees if we are found to have willfully infringed a patent. A finding of infringement could prevent us from commercializing a product or force us to cease some of our business operations, which could 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. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation or administrative proceedings, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments, and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could adversely affect the price of our common stock. In addition, any uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of any litigation could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise additional funds or otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

We may be subject to claims that our former, current or future employees, collaborators or other third parties have an interest in our patents or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. The failure to name the proper inventors on a patent application can result in the patents issuing thereon being unenforceable. Inventorship disputes may arise from conflicting views regarding the contributions of different individuals named as inventors or the effects of foreign laws where foreign nationals are involved in the development of the subject matter of the patent. Furthermore, ownership disputes may arise from alleged contributions of third parties involved in developing our product candidates and may result in joint ownership of our inventions. Litigation may be necessary to resolve these and other claims challenging inventorship and/or ownership. Any disagreement over inventorship could result in our being forced to defend our determination of inventorship in a legal action which could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to our senior management and scientific personnel. Alternatively, or additionally, we may enter into agreements to clarify the scope of our rights in such intellectual property. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees.

We consider proprietary trade secrets or confidential know-how and unpatented know-how to be important to our business. We may rely on trade secrets or confidential know-how to protect our technology, especially where patent protection is believed by us to be of limited value. We expect to rely on third parties for future manufacturing of our product candidates. We also expect to collaborate with third parties on the development of our product candidates and as a result must, at times, share trade secrets with our collaborators. We 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.

Trade secrets or confidential know-how can be difficult to maintain as confidential. To protect this type of information against disclosure or appropriation by competitors, our policy is to require our employees, consultants, contractors and advisors to enter into confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, material transfer agreements, consulting agreements or other similar agreements with us 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, including our trade secrets. However, current or former employees, consultants, contractors and advisers may unintentionally or willfully disclose our confidential information to competitors, and confidentiality agreements may not provide an adequate remedy in the event of unauthorized disclosure of confidential information. The need to share trade secrets and other confidential information, including with future business partners, collaborators, contractors and others located in countries at heightened risk of theft of trade secrets, increases the risk that such trade secrets become known by our competitors, are inadvertently incorporated into the technology of others, or are disclosed or used in violation of these agreements. Given that our proprietary position is based, in part, on our know-how and trade secrets, a competitor’s discovery of our trade secrets or other unauthorized use or disclosure would impair our competitive position and may have an adverse effect on our business and results of operations. Enforcing a claim that a third party obtained illegally and is using trade secrets or confidential know-how is expensive, time consuming and unpredictable. In addition, some courts inside and outside the United States are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets and know-how. The enforceability of confidentiality agreements may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.

In addition, these agreements typically restrict the ability of our advisors, employees, third-party contractors and consultants to publish data potentially relating to our trade secrets, although our agreements may contain certain limited publication rights. Despite our efforts to protect our trade secrets, our competitors may discover our trade secrets, either through breach of our agreements with third parties, independent development or publication of information by any of our third-party collaborators and we would have no right to prevent them from using that technology or information to compete with us. A competitor’s discovery of our trade secrets would impair our competitive position and have an adverse impact on our business.

If we in-license other product candidates in the future, we might become dependent on proprietary rights from third parties with respect to those product candidates. Any termination of such licenses could result in the loss of significant rights and would cause material adverse harm to our ability to develop and commercialize any product candidates subject to such licenses. Even if we are able to in-license any such necessary intellectual property, it could be on nonexclusive terms, including with respect to the use, field or territory of the licensed intellectual property, thereby giving our competitors and other third parties access to the same intellectual property licensed to us. In-licensing IP rights presently and in the future could require us to make substantial licensing and royalty payments. Patents licensed to us could be put at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly in litigation filed by or against our licensors or another licensee or in administrative proceedings. If any in-licensed patents are invalidated or held unenforceable, we may not be able to prevent competitors or other third parties from developing and commercializing competitive products.

Our present or future licensors may have relied upon or may rely upon third-party consultants or collaborators or on funds from third parties such that our present or future licensors may not be the sole and exclusive owners of the patents we in-license. If other third parties have ownership rights to our present or future in-licensed patents, they may be able to license such patents to our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technology. This could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

We do not currently own any registered trademarks and we have not filed any trademark applications to date. While we may have common law protection for certain of our trademarks and trade names, it may be harder for us to rely on any such common law protection to prevent third parties from copying or using our trademarks or trade names without our permission. Our current or future trademarks or trade names may be challenged, infringed, circumvented or declared generic or determined to be infringing on other marks. As a means to enforce our trademark rights and prevent infringement, we may be required to file trademark claims against third parties or initiate trademark opposition proceedings. This can be expensive and time-consuming, particularly for a company of our size. We may not be able to protect our rights to our trademarks and trade names or may be forced to stop using these names, which we need for name recognition by potential partners or customers in our markets of interest. At times, competitors may adopt trade names or trademarks similar to ours, thereby impeding our ability to build brand identity and possibly leading to market confusion. In addition, there could be potential trade name or trademark infringement claims brought by owners of other registered trademarks or trademarks that incorporate variations of our registered or unregistered trademarks or trade names. Over the long term, if we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, then we may not be able to compete effectively and our business may be adversely affected. During trademark registration proceedings, we may receive rejections. Although we would be given an opportunity to respond to those rejections, we may be unable to overcome such rejections. In addition, in the USPTO and in comparable agencies in many foreign jurisdictions, third parties are given an opportunity to oppose pending trademark applications and to seek to cancel registered trademarks. Opposition or cancellation proceedings may be filed against our trademarks, and our trademarks may not survive such proceedings. Moreover, any name we propose to use for our products in the United States must be approved by the FDA, regardless of whether we have registered it, or applied to register it, as a trademark. Similar requirements exist in Europe. The FDA typically conducts a review of proposed product names, including an evaluation of potential for confusion with other product names. If the FDA (or an equivalent administrative body in a foreign jurisdiction) objects to any of our proposed product names, we may be required to expend significant additional resources in an effort to identify a usable substitute name that would qualify under applicable trademark laws, not infringe the existing rights of third parties and be acceptable to the FDA. Furthermore, in many countries, owning and maintaining a trademark registration may not provide an adequate defense against a subsequent infringement claim asserted by the owner of a senior trademark. If we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, we may not be able to compete effectively and our business may be adversely affected.

The market price of our common stock may be volatile, which could result in substantial losses for our stockholders.

The trading price of our common stock may be volatile and could be subject to wide fluctuations in response to various factors, some of which are beyond our control, including limited trading volume. The market price for our common stock may be influenced by those factors discussed in this “Risk Factors” section and many others, some of which may include:

In recent years, the stock market in general and the market for pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies in particular, has experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to changes in the operating performance of the companies whose stock is experiencing those price and volume fluctuations. Market and industry factors may seriously affect the market price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance. Following periods of such volatility in the market price of a company’s securities, securities class action litigation has often been brought against that company. Because of the potential volatility of our stock price, we may become the target of securities litigation in the future. Securities litigation could result in substantial costs, damage our reputation, and divert management’s and the board of directors’ attention and resources.

We have incurred and will incur significant costs as a result of operating as a public company, and our management will be required to devote substantial time to new compliance initiatives and corporate governance practices.

As a public company, we have incurred and will incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“SOX”), the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the listing requirements of the Nasdaq Capital Market and other applicable securities rules and regulations impose various requirements on public companies, including establishment and maintenance of effective disclosure and financial controls and corporate governance practices. We have hired, and expect that we will need to continue to hire, additional accounting, finance and other personnel in connection with our becoming, and our efforts to comply with the requirements of being, a public company. Our management and other personnel need to devote a substantial amount of time towards maintaining compliance with these requirements. These requirements will continue to increase our legal and financial compliance costs and will make some activities more time-consuming and costly. For example, the rules and regulations applicable to us as a public company make it more difficult and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, which makes it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified members of our board of directors. We continue to evaluate these rules and regulations and cannot predict or estimate the amount of additional costs we may incur or the timing of such costs. These rules and regulations are often subject to varying interpretations, in many cases due to their lack of specificity, and, as a result, their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance is provided by regulatory and governing bodies. This could result in continuing uncertainty regarding compliance matters and higher costs necessitated by ongoing revisions to disclosure and governance practices.

Pursuant to SOX Section 404, we will be required to furnish a report by our management on our internal control over financial reporting beginning with our second filing of an Annual Report on Form 10-K with the SEC. However, while we remain an emerging growth company or a non-accelerated filer, we will not be required to include an attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm. To achieve compliance with SOX Section 404 within the prescribed period, we will be engaged in a process to document and evaluate our internal control over financial reporting, which is both costly and challenging. In this regard, we will need to continue to dedicate internal resources, potentially engage outside consultants, adopt a detailed work plan to assess and document the adequacy of internal control over financial reporting, continue steps to improve control processes as appropriate, validate through testing that controls are functioning as documented and implement a continuous reporting and improvement process for internal control over financial reporting. Despite our efforts, there is a risk that we will not be able to conclude, within the prescribed timeframe or at all, that our internal control over financial reporting is effective as required by SOX Section 404. This could result in an adverse reaction in the financial markets due to a loss of confidence in the reliability of our financial statements.

An active or liquid market in our common stock may not be sustained. The lack of an active market may impair the value of our outstanding shares of common stock and our stockholders’ ability to sell their shares at the desired time and price. An inactive market may also impair our ability to raise capital by selling our common stock and our ability to enter into strategic collaborations or acquire other companies, products, or technologies by using our common stock as consideration.

We may not be able to satisfy continued listing requirements of Nasdaq or obtain or maintain a listing of our common stock on Nasdaq.

If securities analysts do not continue to publish research or reports about our business or if they publish negative evaluations of our stock, the price of our stock could decline.

The trading market for our common stock relies in part on the research and reports that industry or financial analysts publish about us or our business. If one or more of the analysts covering our business downgrade their evaluations of our stock, the price of our stock could decline. Similarly, if one or more of these analysts cease to cover our stock, we could lose visibility in the market for our stock, which in turn could cause our stock price to decline.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market could occur at any time. These sales, or the perception in the market that the holders of a large number of shares of common stock intend to sell shares, could reduce the market price of our common stock. Following completion of our IPO, we had 13,917,587 shares of common stock outstanding. In addition, the underwriter exercised its option to purchase an additional 937,500 shares pursuant to its over-allotment option, which increased our number of shares outstanding to 14,855,087 shares. Of these shares, the 7,187,500 shares sold in our IPO may be resold in the public market immediately. The resale of approximately 7,667,587 shares of our outstanding common stock is currently restricted under securities laws or as a result of lock-up or other agreements, but will be able to be sold after the expiration of the lock-up 180 days after the date of the IPO Prospectus and termination of restrictions under securities laws. The lock-up agreements with the underwriter are subject to certain exceptions and the underwriter may, in its sole discretion, release all or some portion of the shares subject to such lock-up agreements at any time and for any reason. We have also registered all shares of common stock that we may issue under our equity compensation plans or that are issuable upon exercise of outstanding options. These shares can be freely sold in the public market upon issuance and once vested, subject to volume limitations applicable to affiliates and the lock-up agreements. If any of these additional shares are sold, or if it is perceived that they will be sold, in the public market, the market price of our common stock could decline.

We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012 (the “JOBS Act”). For so long as we remain an emerging growth company, we are permitted and plan to rely on exemptions from certain disclosure requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies. These exemptions include not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of SOX Section 404, not being required to comply with any requirement for a supplement to the auditor’s report providing additional information about the audit and the financial statements, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation and exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. As a result, the information we provide stockholders will be different than the information that is available with respect to other public companies.

In addition, the JOBS Act provides that an emerging growth company can take advantage of an extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards. This allows an emerging growth company to delay the adoption of certain accounting standards until those standards would otherwise apply to private companies. We have elected to avail ourselves of this exemption, and, therefore, while we are an emerging growth company we are not subject to the new or revised accounting standards at the same time that they become applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies. As a result of this election, our financial statements may not be comparable to those of other public companies that comply with new or revised accounting pronouncements as of public company effective dates. We may choose to early adopt any new or revised accounting standards whenever such early adoption is permitted for private companies.

We are also a “smaller reporting company” as defined i under the Exchange Act. We may continue to be a smaller reporting company if either (i) the market value of our stock held by non-affiliates is less than $250 million as of the last business day of our second fiscal quarter or (ii) our annual revenue was less than $100 million during the most recently completed fiscal year and the market value of our stock held by non-affiliates is less than $700 million as of the last business day of our second fiscal quarter. If we are a smaller reporting company at the time we cease to be an emerging growth company, we may continue to rely on exemptions from certain disclosure requirements that are available to smaller reporting companies. Specifically, as a smaller reporting company we may choose to present only the two most recent fiscal years of audited financial statements in our Annual Report on Form 10-K and, similar to emerging growth companies, smaller reporting companies have reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation.

Insiders own a significant percentage of our common stock and have the ability to exert significant control over matters subject to stockholder approval.

Our directors and executive officers and their affiliates collectively own a significant percentage of our outstanding common stock. As a result, these stockholders, if they act together, will be able to influence our management and affairs and all matters requiring stockholder approval. For example, these stockholders may be able to control or significantly influence elections of directors, amendments of our organizational documents or approval of any merger, sale of assets or other major corporate transaction. This concentration of ownership may have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control of our company and might affect the market price of our common stock.

Prior to the completion of our IPO, we were a private company with limited accounting personnel to adequately execute our accounting processes and limited supervisory resources with which to address our internal control over financial reporting. In connection with the preparation of our financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024, material weaknesses were identified in the design and operating effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.

We did not appropriately design and maintain an effective control environment over the financial reporting process, including a lack of segregation of duties and design and documentation of formalized processes and procedures over financial reporting in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Specifically, we lack a sufficient number of qualified resources to ensure adequate oversight, evaluation of complex transactions and accountability over the performance of controls while maintaining appropriate segregation of duties. Without such resources, we have been unable to design and maintain appropriate segregation of duties in the initiation, recording and approval of transactions within our financial systems and the evaluation of complex transactions. Management also has not designed and maintained user access controls that adequately restrict user and privileged access to financial applications which created segregation of duties deficiencies. In addition, during the course of preparing for our IPO, we determined that material adjustments to the net loss per share amounts were necessary, which required us to restate our financial statements for the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024. These material weaknesses resulted in a misstatement of our financial statements and could in the future result in a misstatement of substantially all of our accounts or disclosures that would result in a material misstatement of our annual or interim financial statements that would not be prevented or detected.

We have initiated a formal risk assessment of our processes and procedures and will design sufficient controls to remediate these weaknesses. We have hired, and intend to continue to hire, additional experienced accounting and financial reporting personnel, and are formalizing the design and implementation of internal controls over the financial reporting process, including general controls over information systems using part of the proceeds from our IPO. The material weaknesses will not be considered remediated until management completes the design and implementation of the measures described above and the controls operate for a sufficient period of time and management has concluded, through testing, that these controls are effective. We expect to begin implementing new procedures and controls during the fourth quarter of 2026 to address the identified material weaknesses. We expect the implementation of these remediation measures, together with the operation and testing of the new controls and any modifications determined to be necessary, to continue through the middle of 2027. The material weaknesses will not be considered remediated until the applicable controls have operated for a sufficient period of time and management has concluded, through appropriate testing, that such controls are designed and operating effectively.

We cannot be certain that we will be able to undertake these planned remediation measures or that any such remediation measures we take will be sufficient to remediate the material weaknesses we have identified or avoid potential future material weaknesses. If the steps we take do not correct the material weaknesses in a timely manner, we will be unable to conclude that we maintain effective internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, there could continue to be a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our financial statements would not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.

Ensuring that we have adequate internal financial and accounting controls and procedures in place so that we can produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis is a costly and time-consuming effort that needs to be re-evaluated frequently. Our internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. We have begun the process of documenting, reviewing and improving our internal controls and procedures for compliance with SOX Section 404, which will require annual management assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. However, our auditors will not be required to formally attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting pursuant to SOX Section 404 until we are no longer an emerging growth company if we continue to take advantage of the exemptions available to us through the JOBS Act.

Our amended and restated bylaws designate specific courts as the exclusive forum for certain litigation that may be initiated by our stockholders, which could limit stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us.

Pursuant to our amended and restated bylaws, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the sole and exclusive forum for any state law claims for (i) any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf; (ii) any action asserting a claim of or based on a breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any director, officer or other employee of ours to us or our stockholders; (iii) any action asserting a claim pursuant to any provision of the Delaware General Corporation Law (“DGCL”), our second amended and restated certificate of incorporation or our amended and restated bylaws or as to which the DGCL confers jurisdiction on the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware; or (iv) any action asserting a claim governed by the internal affairs doctrine, ( the “Delaware Forum Provision”). The Delaware Forum Provision will not apply to any causes of action arising under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act. Our amended and restated bylaws further provide that unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the federal district courts of the United States shall be the sole and exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act, the Exchange Act, the respective rules and regulations promulgated thereunder (the “Federal Forum Provision”). In addition, our amended and restated bylaws provide that any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in shares of our capital stock is deemed to have notice of and consented to the Delaware Forum Provision and the Federal Forum Provision; provided, however, that stockholders cannot and will not be deemed to have waived our compliance with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder.

Provisions in our second amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws and Delaware law may have anti-takeover effects that could discourage an acquisition of us by others, even if an acquisition would be beneficial to our stockholders, and may prevent attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management.

Our second amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws and Delaware law contain provisions that may have the effect of discouraging, delaying or preventing a change in control of us or changes in our management that stockholders may consider favorable, including transactions in which you might otherwise receive a premium for your shares. Our second amended and restated certificate of incorporation and our amended and restated bylaws include provisions that:

In addition, because we are incorporated in the State of Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the DGCL, which prohibits a person who owns in excess of 15 percent of our outstanding voting stock from merging or combining with us for a period of three years after the date of the transaction in which the person acquired in excess of 15 percent of our outstanding voting stock, unless the merger or combination is approved in a prescribed manner.

Any provision of our second amended and restated certificate of incorporation, amended and restated bylaws or Delaware law that has the effect of delaying or deterring a change in control could limit the opportunity for our stockholders to receive a premium for their shares of our common stock and could also affect the price that some investors are willing to pay for our common stock.

Adverse developments that affect financial institutions, such as events involving liquidity that are rumored or actual, have in the past and may in the future lead to market-wide liquidity problems. For example, on March 10, 2023, Silicon Valley Bank was closed by the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, which appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation as receiver. Although we assess our banking relationships as we believe necessary or appropriate, our access to funding sources and other credit arrangements in amounts adequate to finance or capitalize our current and projected future business operations could be significantly impaired by factors that affect us, the financial institutions with which we have credit agreements or arrangements directly, or the financial services industry or economy in general. These factors could include, among others, events such as liquidity constraints or failures, the ability to perform obligations under various types of financial, credit or liquidity agreements or arrangements, disruptions or instability in the financial services industry or financial markets, or concerns or negative expectations about the prospects for companies in the financial services industry.

General risks

Our results of operations could be adversely affected by general conditions in the global economy, geopolitical tensions and in the global financial markets. A severe or prolonged economic downturn or additional global financial and political crises could result in a variety of risks to our business, including weakened demand for any product candidates we develop or our ability to raise additional capital when needed on acceptable terms, if at all. A weak or declining economy could also strain our suppliers or other third parties and create import and export issues, possibly resulting in supply disruption. Any of the foregoing could harm our business and we cannot anticipate all of the ways in which the current economic climate and financial market conditions could adversely impact our business.

We face risks related to health epidemics, pandemics and other widespread outbreaks of contagious diseases, which could significantly disrupt our operations, impact our financial results or otherwise adversely impact our business.

Significant outbreaks of contagious diseases and other adverse public health developments could have a material impact on our business operations and operating results. For example, the spread of COVID-19 affected segments of the global economy and our operations. As a result of similar public health crises that may arise, we may experience disruptions that could adversely impact our operations, research and development, and as we continue developing, any non-clinical studies, clinical trials and manufacturing activities we may conduct, some of which may include:

In addition, the trading prices for biopharmaceutical companies have been highly volatile and we may face similar volatility in our stock price. We cannot predict the scope and severity of any economic recovery of health epidemics, pandemics and other widespread outbreaks of contagious diseases, including following any additional “waves” or other intensifying of a pandemic. If we or any of the third parties with whom we engage were to experience shutdowns or other business disruptions, our ability to conduct our business in the manner and on the timelines presently planned could be materially and negatively affected, which could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, our results of operations and prospects. Furthermore, such pandemics could exacerbate the other risks described in this section.

We or the third parties upon whom we depend may be adversely affected by climate change, earthquakes, outbreak of disease or other natural disasters and our business continuity and disaster recovery plans may not adequately protect us from a serious disaster.

Climate change, earthquakes, outbreak of disease, or other natural disasters, including extreme weather events and changing weather patterns such as storms, flooding, droughts, fires and temperature changes, which have become more common, could severely disrupt our operations, and have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects. If a natural disaster, extreme weather risk, power outage, cybersecurity attack or other event occurred that prevented us from using all or a significant portion of our headquarters, that damaged critical infrastructure, such as the manufacturing facilities of our third-party CDMOs, or that otherwise disrupted operations, it may be difficult or, in certain cases, impossible for us to continue our business for a substantial period of time. For example, we may experience delays in the supply of drug product for our clinical trials as a result of disruptions to the operations of the manufacturing facilities of some of our third-party CDMOs. The disaster recovery and business continuity plans we have in place currently are limited and are unlikely to prove adequate in the event of a serious disaster or similar event. We may incur substantial expenses as a result of the limited nature of our disaster recovery and business continuity plans, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Our ability to effectively monitor and respond to the rapid and ongoing developments and expectations relating to environmental, social and governance matters, including related social expectations and concerns, may impose unexpected costs on us or result in reputational or other harm to us that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

There is an increasing focus and rapid and ongoing developments and changing expectations from certain investors, customers, consumers, employees and other stakeholders concerning environmental, social and corporate governance (“ESG matters”).

A variety of organizations measure the performance of companies on ESG topics, and the results of these assessments are widely publicized. In addition, investments in funds that specialize in companies that perform well in such assessments are increasingly popular, and major institutional investors have publicly emphasized the importance of such ESG measures to their investment decisions. Topics taken into account in such assessments include, among others, the company’s efforts and impacts on climate change and human rights, ethics and compliance with law, and the role of the company’s board of directors in supervising various sustainability issues.

We may be required to make investments in matters related to ESG, which could be significant. Our failure or perceived failure to meet the standards set by various constituencies could damage our reputation and our relationships with investors, governments, customers, employees, third parties and the communities in which we operate and expose us to increased regulatory risk, put us at a commercial disadvantage relative to our peers and materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, ability to participate in debt and equity markets and the value of our shares.