4D Molecular Therapeutics, Inc.

Previous wording

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the risks described below, as well as the other information in this report, including our financial statements and the related notes and the section of this report “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” before deciding whether to invest in our common stock. If any of the following risks actually occur, our business, reputation, financial condition, results of operations, revenue and future prospects could be seriously harmed. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks and uncertainties that we are unaware of, or that we currently believe are not material, may also become important factors that adversely affect our business. Unless otherwise indicated, references to our business being seriously harmed in these risk factors and elsewhere will include harm to our business, reputation, financial condition, results of operations, future prospects and stock price. If our business is seriously harmed, the market price of our common stock could decline, and you could lose part or all of your investment.

Current wording

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the risks described below, as well as the other information in this report, including our condensed financial statements and the related notes and the section of this report “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” before deciding whether to invest in our common stock. If any of the following risks actually occur, our business, reputation, financial condition, results of operations, revenue and future prospects could be seriously harmed. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks and uncertainties that we are unaware of, or that we currently believe are not material, may also become important factors that adversely affect our business. Unless otherwise indicated, references to our business being seriously harmed in these risk factors and elsewhere will include harm to our business, reputation, financial condition, results of operations, future prospects and stock price. If our business is seriously harmed, the market price of our common stock could decline, and you could lose part or all of your investment.

Previous wording

We are a leading late-stage biotechnology advancing durable and disease-targeted therapeutics with potential to transform treatment paradigms and provide unprecedented benefits to patients. We commenced operations in September 2013, have no products approved for commercial sale and have not generated any product revenue. Drug development is a highly uncertain undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. If our product candidates are not successfully developed and approved, we may never generate any product revenue. To date, we have not completed any clinical trials (including any pivotal clinical trial), obtained marketing approval for any product candidates, manufactured commercial scale quantities of any of our product candidates or arranged for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conducted sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Our limited operating history as a company and stage of drug development make any assessment of our future success and viability subject to significant uncertainty. We will encounter risks and difficulties frequently experienced by biopharmaceutical companies in rapidly evolving fields, and we have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfully overcome such risks and difficulties. If we do not address these risks and difficulties successfully, our business will be seriously harmed.

Current wording

We are a leading late-stage biotechnology company advancing durable and disease-targeted therapeutics with the potential to transform treatment paradigms and provide unprecedented benefits to patients. We commenced operations in September 2013, have no products approved for commercial sale and have not generated any product revenue. Drug development is a highly uncertain undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. If our product candidates are not successfully developed and approved, we may never generate any product revenue. To date, we have not completed any clinical trials (including any pivotal clinical trial), obtained marketing approval for any product candidates, manufactured commercial scale quantities of any of our product candidates or arranged for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conducted sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Our limited operating history as a company and stage of drug development make any assessment of our future success and viability subject to significant uncertainty. We will encounter risks and difficulties frequently experienced by biopharmaceutical companies in rapidly evolving fields, and we have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfully overcome such risks and difficulties. If we do not address these risks and difficulties successfully, our business will be seriously harmed.

Previous wording

We have incurred recurring net losses, including net losses of $56.9 million and $43.8 million for the three months ended September 30, 2025 and 2024, respectively, and $159.5 million and $111.2 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2025 and 2024, respectively. As of September 30, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $735.7 million.

Current wording

We have incurred recurring net losses, including net losses of $68.8 million and $48.0 million for the three months ended March 31, 2026 and 2025, respectively. As of March 31, 2026, we had an accumulated deficit of $785.1 million.

Previous wording

We have devoted substantially all of our financial resources and efforts on research and development activities, including for our product candidates and our Therapeutic Vector Evolution platform. We do not expect to generate revenue from product sales for several years, if at all. We continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to our ongoing operations. The amount of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the level of our future expenditures and our ability to generate revenue. Moreover, our net losses may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year, such that a period-to-period comparison of our results of operations may not be a good indication of our future performance.

Current wording

We have devoted substantially all of our financial resources and efforts on research and development activities. We do not expect to generate revenue from product sales for several years, if at all. We continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to our ongoing operations. The amount of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the level of our future expenditures and our ability to generate revenue. Moreover, our net losses may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year, such that a period-to-period comparison of our results of operations may not be a good indication of our future performance.

Previous wording

As of September 30, 2025, we had $372.2 million in cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities.

Current wording

As of March 31, 2026, we had $457.6 million in cash and cash equivalents and marketable securities.

Previous wording

Based on our current operating plan, we believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities will allow us to fund our planned operations for at least one year from the date of the issuance of the financial statements included in this report.

Current wording

Based on our current operating plan, we believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities will allow us to fund our planned operations for at least one year from the date of the issuance of the condensed financial statements included in this report.

Previous wording

Due to the significant resources required for the development of our product candidates, in particular our product candidates in IND-enabling studies and those in clinical trials, we must decide which product candidates and indications to pursue and advance and the amount of resources to allocate to each. Our decisions concerning the allocation of research, development, collaboration, management and financial resources toward particular product candidates or therapeutic areas may not lead to the development of any viable commercial product and may divert resources away from better opportunities. Similarly, our potential decisions to delay, terminate or collaborate with third parties in respect of certain product candidates may subsequently also prove to be less than optimal and could cause us to miss valuable opportunities. If we make incorrect determinations regarding the viability or market potential of any of our product candidates or misread trends in the biopharmaceutical industry, in particular for ophthalmology and pulmonology, our business could be seriously harmed. As a result, we may fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities, be required to forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates or other diseases that may later prove to have greater commercial potential than those we choose to pursue, or relinquish valuable rights to such product candidates through collaboration, licensing or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been advantageous for us to invest additional resources to retain sole development and commercialization rights.

Current wording

Due to the significant resources required for the development of our product candidates, in particular our product candidates in IND-enabling studies and those in clinical trials, we must decide which product candidates and indications to pursue and advance and the amount of resources to allocate to each. Our decisions concerning the allocation of research, development, collaboration, management and financial resources toward particular product candidates or therapeutic areas may not lead to the development of any viable commercial product and may divert resources away from better opportunities. Similarly, our potential decisions to delay, terminate or collaborate with third parties in respect of certain product candidates may subsequently also prove to be less than optimal and could cause us to miss valuable opportunities. If we make incorrect determinations regarding the viability or market potential of any of our product candidates or misread trends in the biopharmaceutical industry, particularly in retina and pulmonology, our business could be seriously harmed. As a result, we may fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities, be required to forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates or other diseases that may later prove to have greater commercial potential than those we choose to pursue, or relinquish valuable rights to such product candidates through collaboration, licensing or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been advantageous for us to invest additional resources to retain sole development and commercialization rights.

Previous wording

Our quarterly and annual operating results may fluctuate significantly, which makes it difficult for us to predict our future operating results. These fluctuations may occur due to a variety of factors, many of which are outside of our control and may be difficult to predict, including:

Current wording

Our quarterly and annual operating results may fluctuate significantly, making it difficult for us to predict our future operating results. These fluctuations may occur due to a variety of factors, many of which are outside our control and may be difficult to predict, including:

Previous wording

the timing and cost of, and level of investment in research, development and commercialization activities, which may change from time to time;

Current wording

the timing, cost, and level of investment in research, development and commercialization activities, which may change from time to time;

Previous wording

timing and amount of any option, milestone, royalty or other payments due under any current or future collaboration or license agreement;

Current wording

the timing and amount of any option, milestone, royalty or other payments due under any current or future collaboration or license agreement;

Previous wording

The National Institutes of Health (“NIH”) Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant DNA Molecules (“NIH Guidelines”) require supervision of human gene transfer trials, including evaluation and assessment by an Institutional Biosafety Committee (“IBC”), a local institutional committee that reviews and oversees research utilizing recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecules at that institution. The IBC assesses the safety of the research and identifies any potential risk to the public health or the environment, and such review may result in some delay before initiation of a clinical trial. While the NIH Guidelines are not mandatory unless the research in question is being conducted at or sponsored by institutions receiving NIH funding of recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecule research, many companies and other institutions not otherwise subject to the NIH Guidelines voluntarily follow them.

Current wording

The National Institutes of Health (“NIH”) Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant DNA Molecules (“NIH Guidelines”) require supervision of human gene transfer trials, including evaluation and assessment by an Institutional Biosafety Committee (“IBC”), a local institutional committee that reviews and oversees research utilizing recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecules at that institution. The IBC assesses the safety of the research and identifies any potential risk to public health or the environment, and such review may result in some delay before initiation of a clinical trial. While the NIH Guidelines are not mandatory unless the research in question is being conducted at or sponsored by institutions receiving NIH funding of recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecule research, many companies and other institutions not otherwise subject to the NIH Guidelines voluntarily follow them.

Previous wording

Similar requirements apply in the EU. The EMA has a Committee for Advanced Therapies (“CAT”) that is responsible for assessing the quality, safety and efficacy of advanced therapy medicinal products, or ATMP(s). ATMPs include gene therapy medicines, somatic-cell therapy medicines and tissue-engineered medicines. The role of the CAT is to prepare a draft opinion on an application for marketing authorization for ATMP candidate that is submitted to the EMA. In the EU, the development and evaluation of an ATMP must be considered in the context of the relevant EU guidelines. The EMA may issue new guidelines concerning the development and marketing authorization for gene therapy medicinal products and require that we comply with these new guidelines. Similarly complex regulatory environments exist in other jurisdictions.

Current wording

Similar requirements apply in the EU. The EMA has a Committee for Advanced Therapies (“CAT”) that is responsible for assessing the quality, safety and efficacy of advanced therapy medicinal products, or ATMP(s). ATMPs include gene therapy medicines, somatic-cell therapy medicines and tissue-engineered medicines. The role of the CAT is to prepare a draft opinion on an application for marketing authorization for an ATMP candidate that is submitted to the EMA. In the EU, the development and evaluation of an ATMP must be considered in the context of the relevant EU guidelines. The EMA may issue new guidelines concerning the development and marketing authorization for gene therapy medicinal products and require that we comply with these new guidelines. Similarly complex regulatory environments exist in other jurisdictions.

Previous wording

Clinical testing is expensive, time consuming, and subject to uncertainty. We cannot guarantee that any clinical trials will be initiated or conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all. We also cannot be sure that submission of an IND or a clinical trial application (“CTA”) will result in the FDA or other regulatory authority, as applicable, allowing clinical trials to begin in a timely manner, if at all. Moreover, even if these trials begin, issues may arise that could delay, suspend or terminate such clinical trials. A failure of one or more clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing, and our future clinical trials may not be successful. For example, in 2025, we initiated our wet AMD Phase 3 studies comparing a single dose of 4D-150 3E10 vg/eye to on-label aflibercept 2mg Q8 weeks. If we experience any delays in completing these trials, due to delays in enrollment or other factors, it could result in serious harm our business. Events that may prevent successful or timely initiation or completion of clinical trials include:

Current wording

Clinical testing is expensive, time consuming, and subject to uncertainty. We cannot guarantee that any clinical trials will be initiated, conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all. We also cannot be sure that submission of an IND or a clinical trial application (“CTA”) will result in the FDA or other regulatory authority, as applicable, allowing clinical trials to begin in a timely manner, if at all. Moreover, even if these trials begin, issues may arise that could delay, suspend or terminate such clinical trials. A failure of one or more clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing, and our future clinical trials may not be successful. In 2025, we initiated our wet AMD Phase 3 studies comparing a single dose of 4D-150 3E10 vg/eye to on-label aflibercept 2mg Q8 weeks. If we experience any delays in completing these trials, due to delays in enrollment or other factors, it could result in serious harm to our business. Events that may prevent successful or timely initiation or completion of clinical trials include:

Previous wording

transfer of manufacturing processes to larger-scale facilities operated by a CMO or by us, and delays or failure by our CMOs or us to make any necessary changes to such manufacturing process;

Current wording

transfer of manufacturing processes to larger-scale facilities operated by a CDMO or by us, and delays or failure by our CDMOs or us to make any necessary changes to such manufacturing process;

Previous wording

Patient enrollment, a determinative factor in the timing of clinical trials, is affected by many factors including the severity of and difficulty of diagnosing the disease under investigation, knowledge of the disease in the medical community and availability of effective diagnostic methods, size and distribution of the patient population and process for identifying subjects, access of patients to medical professionals experienced in their disease, our ability to effectively disseminate information about our clinical trials to the patient population and access of patients to such information, eligibility and exclusion criteria for the trial in question, design of the trial protocol, availability, efficacy of, and our ability to compete with approved and standard of care therapies or other clinical trials for the disease or condition under investigation, perceived risks and benefits of the product candidate under trial or testing, availability of genetic testing for potential patients, efforts to facilitate timely enrollment in clinical trials, patient referral practices of physicians, ability to obtain and maintain subject consent, the risk that enrolled subjects will drop out before completion of the trial, the ability to monitor patients adequately during and after treatment, the time and financial commitments required of patients to enroll in our trials beyond the costs covered by the company, and the proximity and availability of and access to clinical trial sites for prospective patients. Furthermore, we rely on CROs and clinical trial sites to ensure the proper and timely conduct of our clinical trials, and while we have agreements governing their committed activities, we have limited influence over their actual performance.

Current wording

Patient enrollment, a determinative factor in the timing of clinical trials, is affected by many factors including the severity and difficulty of diagnosing the disease under investigation, knowledge of the disease in the medical community and availability of effective diagnostic methods, size and distribution of the patient population and process for identifying subjects, access of patients to medical professionals experienced in their disease, our ability to effectively disseminate information about our clinical trials to the patient population and access of patients to such information, eligibility and exclusion criteria for the trial in question, design of the trial protocol, availability, efficacy of, and our ability to compete with approved and standard of care therapies or other clinical trials for the disease or condition under investigation, perceived risks and benefits of the product candidate under trial or testing, availability of genetic testing for potential patients, efforts to facilitate timely enrollment in clinical trials, patient referral practices of physicians, ability to obtain and maintain subject consent, the risk that enrolled subjects will drop out before completion of the trial, the ability to monitor patients adequately during and after treatment, the time and financial commitments required of patients to enroll in our trials beyond the costs covered by the company, and the proximity and availability of and access to clinical trial sites for prospective patients. Furthermore, we rely on CROs and clinical trial sites to ensure the proper and timely conduct of our clinical trials, and while we have agreements governing their committed activities, we have limited influence over their actual performance.

Previous wording

If any of our product candidates successfully completes clinical trials, we generally plan to seek regulatory approval to market our product candidates in the United States, the EU, and in additional foreign countries where we believe there is a viable commercial opportunity. We have never commenced, compiled or submitted an application seeking regulatory approval to market any product candidate, which may impede our ability to secure approval and successfully launch our therapies. We may never receive regulatory approval to market any product candidates even if such product candidates successfully complete clinical trials, which would seriously harm our business. To obtain regulatory approval in countries outside the United States, we must comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of such other countries regarding safety, efficacy, purity, potency, chemistry, manufacturing and controls, clinical trials, commercial sales, pricing and distribution of our product candidates. We may also rely on our collaborators or collaboration partners to conduct the required activities to support an application for regulatory approval, and to seek approval, for one or more of our product candidates. We cannot be sure that our collaborators or collaboration partners will conduct these activities successfully or do so within the timeframe we desire. Even if we (or our collaborators or collaboration partners) are successful in obtaining approval in one jurisdiction, we cannot assure you that we will obtain approval in any other jurisdictions. Failure to obtain approval for our product candidates in multiple jurisdictions will seriously harm our business.

Current wording

If any of our product candidates successfully complete clinical trials, we generally plan to seek regulatory approval to market our product candidates in the United States, the EU, and in additional foreign countries where we believe there is a viable commercial opportunity. We have never commenced, compiled or submitted an application seeking regulatory approval to market any product candidate, which may impede our ability to secure approval and successfully launch our therapies. We may never receive regulatory approval to market any product candidates even if such product candidates successfully complete clinical trials, which would seriously harm our business. To obtain regulatory approval in countries outside the United States, we must comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of such other countries regarding safety, efficacy, purity, potency, chemistry, manufacturing and controls, clinical trials, commercial sales, pricing and distribution of our product candidates. We may also rely on our collaborators or collaboration partners to conduct the required activities to support an application for regulatory approval, and to seek approval, for one or more of our product candidates. We cannot be sure that our collaborators or collaboration partners will conduct these activities successfully or do so within the timeframe we desire. Even if we (or our collaborators or collaboration partners) are successful in obtaining approval in one jurisdiction, we cannot assure you that we will obtain approval in any other jurisdictions. Failure to obtain approval for our product candidates in multiple jurisdictions will seriously harm our business.

Previous wording

Disruptions at the FDA and other government agencies caused by funding shortages, staffing limitations or global health concerns could hinder their ability to hire, retain or deploy key leadership and other personnel, or otherwise prevent new or modified products from being developed, approved or commercialized in a timely manner or at all.

Current wording

Disruptions at the FDA and other government agencies caused by funding shortages, staffing limitations or policy changes could hinder their ability to hire, retain or deploy key leadership and other personnel, or otherwise prevent new or modified products from being developed, approved or commercialized in a timely manner or at all.

Previous wording

The ability of the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities to review and/or approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget, personnel, and funding levels, statutory, regulatory, and policy changes, the FDA’s and foreign regulatory authorities’ ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and other events that may otherwise affect the FDA’s or foreign regulatory authorities’ ability to perform routine functions. Average review times at the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable. Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies may also slow the time necessary for new drugs and biologics 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 FDA employees and stop critical activities. In addition, the current U.S. Presidential administration has issued certain policies and Executive Orders directed towards reducing the employee headcount and costs associated with U.S. administrative agencies, including the FDA, and it remains unclear the degree to which these efforts may limit or otherwise adversely affect the FDA's ability to conduct routine activities.

Current wording

The ability of the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities to review and/or approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget, personnel, and funding levels, statutory, regulatory, and policy changes, the FDA’s and foreign regulatory authorities’ ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and other events that may otherwise affect the FDA’s or foreign regulatory authorities’ ability to perform routine functions. Average review times at the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable. Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies may also slow the time necessary for new drugs and biologics 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 FDA employees and stop critical activities. In addition, the current U.S. Presidential administration has issued certain policies and Executive Orders directed towards reducing the employee headcount and costs associated with U.S. administrative agencies, including the FDA, which have resulted in substantial personnel changes, and it remains unclear the degree to which these efforts may limit or otherwise adversely affect the FDA's ability to conduct routine activities.

Previous wording

Separately, in response to the novel coronavirus pandemic, the FDA postponed most inspections of domestic and foreign manufacturing facilities at various points. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, or if renewed global health concerns, funding shortages or staffing limitations prevent the FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA or such other regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could seriously harm our business.

Current wording

If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, or if funding shortages, staffing limitations, or policy changes prevent the FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities, such events could significantly impact the ability of the FDA or such other regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could seriously harm our business.

Previous wording

In addition, the FDA’s and other regulatory authorities’ policies with respect to clinical trials may change and additional government regulations may be enacted. For instance, the regulatory landscape related to clinical trials in the EU recently evolved. The EU Clinical Trials Regulation (“CTR”), which was adopted in April 2014 and repeals the EU Clinical Trials Directive, became applicable on January 31, 2022. While the EU Clinical Trials Directive required a separate CTA to be submitted in each member state in which the clinical trial takes place, to both the competent national health authority and an independent ethics committee, the CTR introduces a centralized process and only requires the submission of a single application for multi-center trials. The CTR allows sponsors to make a single submission to both the competent authority and an ethics committee in each member state, leading to a single decision per member state. The assessment procedure of the CTA has been harmonized as well, including a joint assessment by all member states concerned, and a separate assessment by each member state with respect to specific requirements related to its own territory, including ethics rules. Each member state’s decision is communicated to the sponsor via the centralized EU portal. Once the CTA is approved, clinical study development may proceed. The CTR foresees a three-year transition period. The extent to which ongoing and new clinical trials will be governed by the CTR varies. Clinical trials for which an application was submitted (i) prior to January 31, 2022 under the EU Clinical Trials Directive, or (ii) between January 31, 2022 and January 31, 2023 and for which the sponsor has opted for the application of the EU Clinical Trials Directive remain governed by said Directive until January 31, 2025. After this date, all clinical trials (including those which are ongoing) will become subject to the provisions of the CTR. Compliance with the CTR requirements by us and our third-party service providers, such as CROs, may impact our developments plans in the EU.

Current wording

In addition, the FDA’s and other regulatory authorities’ policies with respect to clinical trials may change and additional government regulations may be enacted. For instance, the regulatory landscape related to clinical trials in the EU recently evolved. The EU Clinical Trials Regulation (“CTR”), which was adopted in April 2014 and repeals the EU Clinical Trials Directive, became applicable on January 31, 2022. While the EU Clinical Trials Directive required a separate CTA to be submitted in each member state in which the clinical trial takes place, to both the competent national health authority and an independent ethics committee, the CTR introduces a centralized process and only requires the submission of a single application for multi-center trials. The CTR allows sponsors to make a single submission to both the competent authority and an ethics committee in each member state, leading to a single decision per member state. The assessment procedure of the CTA has been harmonized as well, including a joint assessment by all member states concerned, and a separate assessment by each member state with respect to specific requirements related to its own territory, including ethics rules. Each member state’s decision is communicated to the sponsor via the centralized EU portal. Once the CTA is approved, clinical study development may proceed. The CTR foresees a three-year transition period. The extent to which ongoing and new clinical trials will be governed by the CTR varies. Clinical trials for which an application was submitted (i) prior to January 31, 2022 under the EU Clinical Trials Directive, or (ii) between January 31, 2022 and January 31, 2023 and for which the sponsor has opted for the application of the EU Clinical Trials Directive remain governed by said Directive until January 31, 2025. After this date, all clinical trials (including those which are ongoing) will become subject to the provisions of the CTR. Compliance with the CTR requirements by us and our third-party service providers, such as CROs, may impact our development plans in the EU.

Previous wording

There are a number of large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that are currently pursuing the development of products for the treatment of the indications for which we have product candidates, including wet AMD, DME, GA and cystic fibrosis. Certain of our competitors have commercially approved products for the treatment of the diseases that we are pursuing or may pursue in the future, including Apellis, Astellas, Regeneron, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda and Vertex. These drugs are well established therapies and are widely accepted by physicians, patients and third-party payors, which may make it difficult to convince these parties to switch to our product candidates. Companies that we are aware are developing therapeutics in the ophthalmology, cardiology and pulmonology disease areas include large companies with significant financial resources, such as Abbvie, Astellas, Novartis, Opthea, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda and Vertex, and biopharmaceutical companies such as Adverum, Amicus, Apellis,

Current wording

There are a number of large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that are currently pursuing the development of products for the treatment of the indications for which we have product candidates, including wet AMD, DME, GA and cystic fibrosis. Certain of our competitors have commercially approved products for the treatment of the diseases that we are pursuing or may pursue in the future, including Apellis Pharmaceuticals Inc., Astellas Pharma Inc., Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc., Roche and Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated. These drugs are well established therapies and are widely accepted by physicians, patients and third-party payors, which may make it difficult to convince these parties to switch to our product candidates. Companies that we are aware are developing therapeutics in the retina and pulmonology disease areas include large companies with significant financial resources, such as AbbVie Inc, Astellas Pharma Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, Johnson & Johnson, Merck & Company Inc., Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc., Roche, Sanofi and Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated, and biopharmaceutical companies such as Apellis Pharmaceuticals Inc., Arcturus Therapeutics Holdings Inc., EyePoint Inc., Kodiak Sciences Inc., Krystal Biotech Inc., Ocular Therapeutix Inc., Recode Therapeutics Inc., REGENXBIO Inc. and Sionna Therapeutics Inc. In addition to competition from other companies targeting retina and pulmonology, any products we may develop may also face competition from other types of therapies, such as gene-editing therapies and drug delivery devices.

Previous wording

Many of our current or potential competitors, either alone or with their strategic partners, have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals, and marketing approved products than we do. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our product candidates. Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient, or are less expensive than any products that we may develop. Furthermore, currently approved products could be discovered to have application for treatment of ophthalmology, cardiology and pulmonology indications, which could give such products significant regulatory and market timing advantages over any of our product candidates. Our competitors also may obtain FDA, EMA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours. Additionally, products or technologies developed by our competitors may render our potential product candidates uneconomical or obsolete, and we may not be successful in marketing against competitors any product candidates we may develop.

Current wording

Many of our current or potential competitors, either alone or with their strategic partners, have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals, and marketing approved products than we do. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our product candidates. Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient, or are less expensive than any products that we may develop. Furthermore, currently approved products could be discovered to have application for treatment of retina and pulmonology indications, which could give such products significant regulatory and market timing advantages over any of our product candidates. Our competitors also may obtain FDA, EMA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours. Additionally, products or technologies developed by our competitors may render our potential product candidates uneconomical or obsolete, and we may not be successful in marketing against competitors any product candidates we may develop.

Previous wording

We currently manufacture and test clinical trial material for all of our products internally at our cGMP facility, and we have standing relationships with several contract manufacturing organizations. Our product candidates require processing steps that are more complex than those required for most chemical and protein pharmaceuticals. Moreover, unlike chemical pharmaceuticals, the physical and chemical properties of a biologic such as ours generally cannot be fully characterized. As a result, assays of the finished product may not be sufficient to ensure that the product will perform in the intended manner. Accordingly, we employ multiple steps to control our manufacturing process to assure that the process works and the product candidate is made strictly and consistently in compliance with the process. Problems with the manufacturing process, even minor deviations from the normal process, could result in product defects or manufacturing failures that result in lot failures, product recalls, product liability claims or insufficient inventory, which could delay or prevent the initiation of clinical trials or receipt of regulatory approvals. We may encounter problems achieving adequate quantities and quality of clinical-grade materials that meet FDA, or other comparable applicable foreign standards or specifications with consistent and acceptable production yields and costs.

Current wording

We currently manufacture and test clinical trial material for our products both internally at our cGMP facility, and externally at our partner CDMOs. Our product candidates require processing steps that are more complex than those required for most chemical and protein pharmaceuticals. Moreover, unlike chemical pharmaceuticals, the physical and chemical properties of a biologic such as ours generally cannot be fully characterized. As a result, assays of the finished product may not be sufficient to ensure that the product will perform in the intended manner. Accordingly, we employ multiple steps to control our manufacturing process to assure that the process works and the product candidate is made strictly and consistently in compliance with the process. Problems with the manufacturing process, even minor deviations from the normal process, could result in product defects or manufacturing failures that result in lot failures, product recalls, product liability claims or insufficient inventory, which could delay or prevent the initiation of clinical trials or receipt of regulatory approvals. We may encounter problems achieving adequate quantities and quality of clinical-grade materials that meet FDA, or other comparable applicable foreign standards or specifications with consistent and acceptable production yields and costs.

Previous wording

We have completed the build out of approximately 17,000 square feet of laboratory and manufacturing space at our headquarters in Emeryville, California, a large portion of which we plan to devote to manufacturing activities for our clinical trials under cGMP. We may face delays in the production of clinical supply at our manufacturing facility and cannot guarantee when our facility will be able to produce sufficient quantities of product candidates needed to support our planned clinical trials. Any delays in developing our internal manufacturing capabilities may disrupt or delay the supply of our product candidates if we have not maintained a sufficient back-up supply of such product candidates through third-party manufacturers. Moreover, changing manufacturing facilities during the clinical development process may also require that we or our collaborators conduct additional studies, make notifications to regulatory authorities, make additional filings to regulatory authorities, and obtain regulatory authority approval for the new facilities, which may be delayed or which we may never receive. We will further need to comply with the FDA’s and applicable foreign regulatory authorities’ cGMP requirements for the production of product candidates for clinical trials and, if approved, commercial supply, and will be subject to FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authority inspection. These requirements include the qualification and validation of our manufacturing equipment and processes. We may not be able to develop or acquire the internal expertise and resources necessary for compliance with these requirements.

Current wording

We have approximately 17,000 square feet of laboratory and manufacturing space at our headquarters in Emeryville, California, a large portion of which we plan to devote to manufacturing activities for our clinical trials under cGMP. We may face delays in the production of clinical supply at our manufacturing facility and cannot guarantee when our facility will be able to produce sufficient quantities of product candidates needed to support our planned clinical trials. Any delays in developing our internal manufacturing capabilities may disrupt or delay the supply of our product candidates if we have not maintained a sufficient back-up supply of such product candidates through third-party manufacturers. Moreover, changing manufacturing facilities during the clinical development process may also require that we or our collaborators conduct additional studies, make notifications to regulatory authorities, make additional filings to regulatory authorities, and obtain regulatory authority approval for the new facilities, which may be delayed or which we may never receive. We will further need to comply with the FDA’s and applicable foreign regulatory authorities’ cGMP requirements for the production of product candidates for clinical trials and, if approved, commercial supply, and will be subject to FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authority inspection. These requirements include the qualification and validation of our manufacturing equipment and processes. We may not be able to develop or acquire the internal expertise and resources necessary for compliance with these requirements.

Previous wording

We currently rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the production of some of our planned clinical trial drugs and commercial drug materials and, therefore, we can control only certain aspects of their activities. The facilities used by our contract manufacturers to manufacture certain of our product candidates must be reviewed by the FDA pursuant to inspections that will be conducted after we submit a BLA to the FDA. We do not control the manufacturing process of, and are completely dependent on, our contract manufacturing partners for compliance with the cGMP or similar foreign requirements for manufacture of our products. If our contract manufacturers cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the strict regulatory requirements of the FDA or others, we will not be able to obtain and/or maintain regulatory approval for our products as manufactured at their manufacturing 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 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.

Current wording

We currently rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the production of some of our planned clinical trial drugs and commercial drug materials and, therefore, we can control only certain aspects of their activities. The facilities used by our contract manufacturers to manufacture certain of our product candidates must be reviewed by the FDA pursuant to inspections that will be conducted after we submit a BLA to the FDA. We do not control the manufacturing process of, and are completely dependent on, our contract manufacturing partners for compliance with the cGMP or similar foreign requirements for manufacture of our products. If our contract manufacturers cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the strict regulatory requirements of the FDA or others, we will not be able to obtain and/or maintain regulatory approval for our products as manufactured at their manufacturing facilities. Further, our CDMOs may use different facilities to manufacture our product candidate(s), and we and our CDMOs will be required to meet certain regulatory conditions, such as establishing comparability between the product candidates manufactured at each facility. Our failure, or failure by our CDMOs, to demonstrate sufficient comparability between a product candidate manufactured at different facilities may cause a delay in using a manufacturing facility for production, extend our clinical trial timelines and adversely impact our regulatory approval process. 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 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.

Previous wording

reduced control for certain aspects of manufacturing activities;

Current wording

reduced control over certain aspects of manufacturing activities;

Previous wording

In addition, if a product receives the first FDA approval for the disease or condition for which it has orphan designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusivity, which means the FDA may not approve any other application to market the same drug for the same disease or condition for a period of seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority over the product with orphan exclusivity or where the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient product quantity for the orphan patient population. Exclusive marketing rights in the United States may also be unavailable if we or our collaborators seek approval for a disease or condition broader than the orphan designated disease or condition and may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective. In the EU, orphan designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as reduction of fees, fee waivers, protocol assistance, and access to the centralized marketing authorization procedure. Moreover, upon grant of a marketing authorization and assuming the requirement for orphan designation are also met at the time the marketing authorization is granted, orphan medicinal products are entitled to a ten-year period of market exclusivity for the approved therapeutic indication. The period of market exclusivity is extended by two years for orphan medicinal products that have also complied with an agreed Pediatric Investigation Plan (“PIP”). The European exclusivity period can be reduced to six years, if, at the end of the fifth year a medicine no longer meets the criteria for orphan designation (i.e. the prevalence of the condition has increased above the orphan designation threshold or it is judged that the product is sufficiently profitable so as not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity).

Current wording

In addition, if a product receives the first FDA approval for the disease or condition for which it has orphan designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusivity, which means the FDA may not approve any other application to market the same drug for the same approved use or indication within such rare disease or condition for a period of seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority over the product with orphan exclusivity or where the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient product quantity for the orphan patient population. Exclusive marketing rights in the United States may also be unavailable if we or our collaborators seek approval for a disease or condition broader than the orphan designated disease or condition and may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective. In the EU, orphan designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as reduction of fees, fee waivers, protocol assistance, and access to the centralized marketing authorization procedure. Moreover, upon grant of a marketing authorization and assuming the requirement for orphan designation are also met at the time the marketing authorization is granted, orphan medicinal products are entitled to a ten-year period of market exclusivity for the approved therapeutic indication. The period of market exclusivity is extended by two years for orphan medicinal products that have also complied with an agreed Pediatric Investigation Plan (“PIP”). The European exclusivity period can be reduced to six years, if, at the end of the fifth year a medicine no longer meets the criteria for orphan designation (i.e. the prevalence of the condition has increased above the orphan designation threshold or it is judged that the product is sufficiently profitable so as not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity).

Previous wording

Even if we obtain orphan drug designation, we may not be the first to obtain marketing approval for any particular orphan indication due to the uncertainties associated with developing pharmaceutical products. Further, even if we obtain orphan drug exclusivity for a product candidate, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product from competition because different drugs can be approved for the same condition. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities can subsequently approve the same drug with for the same condition if the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities concludes that the later drug is clinically superior in that it is safer, more effective, or makes a major contribution to patient care. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug or biologic nor gives the drug or biologic any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process.

Current wording

Even if we obtain orphan drug designation, we may not be the first to obtain marketing approval for any particular orphan indication due to the uncertainties associated with developing pharmaceutical products. Further, even if we obtain orphan drug exclusivity for a product candidate, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product from competition because different drugs can be approved for the same uses or indications within the same rare disease or condition. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities can subsequently approve the same drug for the same approved use or indication within the same rare disease or condition if the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities concludes that the later drug is clinically superior in that it is safer, more effective, or makes a major contribution to patient care. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug or biologic nor gives the drug or biologic any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process.

Previous wording

The FDA has granted RMAT designation for 4D-150 for the treatment of neovascular (wet) age-related macular degeneration and diabetic macular edema, and may seek additional RMAT designations for 4D-150 or for our other product candidates. An biological product candidate is eligible for RMAT designation if: (1) it meets the definition of a regenerative medicine therapy, which the FDA defines as a cell therapy, therapeutic tissue engineering product, human cell and tissue product, or any combination product using such therapies or products, with limited exceptions; (2) the candidate is intended to treat, modify, reverse, or cure a serious disease or condition; and (3) preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the candidate has the potential to address unmet medical needs for such disease or condition. RMAT designation provides potential benefits that include more frequent meetings with FDA to discuss the development plan for the product candidate, and eligibility for rolling review and priority review of BLAs. Product candidates granted RMAT designation may also be eligible for accelerated approval on the basis of a surrogate or intermediate endpoint reasonably likely to predict long-term clinical benefit, or through reliance upon data obtained from a meaningful number of sites, including through expansion of clinical trials to a sufficient number sites, as appropriate. RMAT-designated product candidates that receive accelerated approval may, as appropriate, be able to fulfill their post-approval requirements through the submission of clinical evidence, clinical studies, patient registries, or other sources of real-world evidence (such as electronic health records), through the collection of larger confirmatory data sets, or via post-approval monitoring of patients treated with the therapy prior to approval.

Current wording

The FDA has granted RMAT designation for 4D-150 for the treatment of neovascular (wet) age-related macular degeneration and diabetic macular edema, and may seek additional RMAT designations for 4D-150 or for our other product candidates. A biological product candidate is eligible for RMAT designation if: (1) it meets the definition of a regenerative medicine therapy, which the FDA defines as a cell therapy, therapeutic tissue engineering product, human cell and tissue product, or any combination product using such therapies or products, with limited exceptions; (2) the candidate is intended to treat, modify, reverse, or cure a serious disease or condition; and (3) preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the candidate has the potential to address unmet medical needs for such disease or condition. RMAT designation provides potential benefits that include more frequent meetings with FDA to discuss the development plan for the product candidate, and eligibility for rolling review and priority review of BLAs. Product candidates granted RMAT designation may also be eligible for accelerated approval on the basis of a surrogate or intermediate endpoint reasonably likely to predict long-term clinical benefit, or through reliance upon data obtained from a meaningful number of sites, including through expansion of clinical trials to a sufficient number of sites, as appropriate. RMAT-designated product candidates that receive accelerated approval may, as appropriate, be able to fulfill their post-approval requirements through the submission of clinical evidence, clinical studies, patient registries, or other sources of real-world evidence (such as electronic health records), through the collection of larger confirmatory data sets, or via post-approval monitoring of patients treated with the therapy prior to approval.

Previous wording

Moreover, Congress included a sunset provision in the statute authorizing the rare pediatric disease priority review voucher program. Under the current statutory sunset provisions, after December 20, 2024, FDA may only award a voucher for an approved rare pediatric disease product application if the sponsor has rare pediatric disease designation for the product candidate, and that designation was granted by December 20, 2024. After September 30, 2026, FDA may not award any rare pediatric disease priority review vouchers, regardless of any rare pediatric disease designation, unless the program is reauthorized by Congress.

Current wording

Moreover, Congress included a sunset provision in the statute authorizing the rare pediatric disease priority review voucher program. Under the current statutory sunset provisions, FDA may only award a voucher for an approved rare pediatric disease product application if the sponsor has rare pediatric disease designation for the product candidate, and the product candidate is approved within the designated rare pediatric disease by September 30, 2029. After September 30, 2029, FDA may not award vouchers under the program, regardless of any designation.

Previous wording

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted. In August 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, led to aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers. In January 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. Additionally, on March 11, 2021, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 was signed into law, which eliminated the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, beginning January 1, 2024. The rebate was previously capped at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price.

Current wording

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted. In August 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, led to aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers. In January 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. Additionally, on March 11, 2021, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 was signed into law, which eliminated the statutory cap on drug manufacturers’ Medicaid drug rebate program liability for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, beginning January 1, 2024. The rebate was previously capped at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price.

Previous wording

Most significantly, in 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (“IRA”) into law. This statute marks the most significant action by Congress with respect to the pharmaceutical industry since adoption of the ACA in 2010. Among other things, the IRA requires manufacturers of certain drugs to engage in price negotiations with Medicare, with prices that can be negotiated subject to a cap; imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation (first due in 2023); redesigns the Medicare Part D benefit (beginning in 2024); and replaces the Part D coverage gap discount program with a new manufacturer discount program (beginning in 2025). CMS has published the negotiated prices for the initial ten drugs, which will first be effective in 2026, and has published the list of the subsequent 15 drugs that will be subject to negotiation. The IRA permits the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. HHS has and will continue to issue and update guidance as these programs are implemented, although the Medicare drug price negotiation program is currently subject to legal challenges. The impact of the IRA on us and the pharmaceutical industry cannot yet be fully determined, but is likely to be significant.

Current wording

In 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (“IRA”) was signed into law. Among other things, the IRA requires manufacturers of certain drugs to engage in price negotiations with Medicare, with prices that can be negotiated subject to a cap; imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation (first due in 2023); redesigns the Medicare Part D benefit (beginning in 2024); and replaces the Part D coverage gap discount program with a new manufacturer discount program (beginning in 2025). CMS has published the negotiated prices for the initial ten drugs, which went into effect in 2026, and the subsequent 15 drugs, which will first be effective in 2027, as well as the next set of 15 drugs that will be subject to negotiation. The IRA permits the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. HHS has and will continue to issue and update guidance as these programs are implemented, although the Medicare drug price negotiation program is currently subject to legal challenges. The impact of the IRA on us and the pharmaceutical industry cannot yet be fully determined, but is likely to be significant.

Previous wording

The Trump administration has issued executive orders that address the pricing of pharmaceuticals in the U.S. and propose a so-called most favored nation pricing policy, which would tie the price of drugs in the U.S. to the lowest price in a group of other countries. While it is unclear whether and how the Trump proposals will be implemented, the Trump policies are likely to have a negative impact on the pharmaceutical industry. Even proposals or executive actions that are ultimately deemed unlawful could negatively impact the U.S. pharmaceutical sector and our business.

Current wording

The Trump administration is pursuing a two-fold strategy to reduce drug costs in the U.S. While it is unclear whether and how the Trump administration’s proposals will be implemented, the Trump administration’s policies are likely to have a negative impact on the pharmaceutical industry and on our ability to receive adequate revenues for our product candidates, if approved. On the one hand, the Trump administration has threatened to impose significant tariffs on pharmaceutical manufacturers that do not adopt pricing policies such as most favored nation pricing, which would tie the price for drugs in the U.S. to the lowest price in a group of other countries. In response, multiple manufacturers have reportedly entered into confidential pricing agreements with the federal government. On the other hand, the Trump administration is pursuing traditional regulatory pathways to impose drug pricing policies, although final regulations have not yet been published. Even regulatory proposals or executive actions that are ultimately deemed unlawful could negatively impact the U.S. pharmaceutical sector and our business. In addition, pharmaceutical pricing and marketing has long been the subject of considerable discussion in Congress and among policymakers, and it is possible that Congress could enact additional laws that negatively affect the pharmaceutical industry.

Previous wording

Individual states in the United States have also increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure, drug price reporting and other transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. Some states have enacted legislation creating so-called prescription drug affordability boards, which ultimately may attempt to impose price limits on certain drugs in these states, while some states are also seeking to implement general, across the board price caps for pharmaceuticals, or are seeking to regulate drug distribution. Some measures are designed to encourage importation from other countries. Legally mandated price controls on payment amounts by third-party payors or other restrictions could seriously harm our business. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs. This could reduce the ultimate demand for our product candidates or put pressure on our product pricing. Furthermore, there has been increased interest by third-party payors and governmental authorities in reference pricing systems and publication of discounts and list prices. Prescription drugs and biological products that are in violation of these requirements will be included on a public list. These reforms could reduce the ultimate demand for our product candidates or put pressure on our product pricing and could seriously harm our business.

Current wording

Individual states in the United States have also increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure, drug price reporting and other transparency measures. Some states have enacted legislation creating so-called prescription drug affordability boards, which ultimately may attempt to impose price limits on certain drugs in these states, while some states are also seeking to implement general, across the board price caps for pharmaceuticals, or are seeking to regulate drug distribution. Some measures are designed to encourage importation from other countries. Legally mandated price controls on payment amounts by third-party payors or other restrictions could seriously harm our business. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs. This could reduce the ultimate demand for our product candidates or put pressure on our product pricing. Furthermore, there has been increased interest by third-party payors and governmental authorities in reference pricing systems and publication of discounts and list prices. Prescription drugs and biological products that are in violation of these requirements will be included on a public list. These reforms could reduce the ultimate demand for our product candidates or put pressure on our product pricing and could seriously harm our business.

Previous wording

the U.S. Physician Payments Sunshine Act and its implementing regulations, which requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies that are reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, with specific exceptions, to report annually to CMS information related to certain payments and other transfers of value to physicians (as defined by statute), certain other non-physician practitioners (including physician assistants, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, certified nurse anesthetists, anesthesiology assistants, and certified nurse midwives) and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members;

Current wording

the U.S. Physician Payments Sunshine Act and its implementing regulations, which require certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies that are reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, with specific exceptions, to report annually to CMS information related to certain payments and other transfers of value to physicians (as defined by statute), certain other non-physician practitioners (including physician assistants, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, certified nurse anesthetists, anesthesiology assistants, and certified nurse midwives) and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members;

Previous wording

We currently rely and expect to continue to rely on third parties, such as CROs, CMOs, clinical data management organizations, clinical data assessments and analysis organizations, medical institutions and clinical investigators, to conduct some aspects of our manufacturing, research, preclinical testing and clinical trials. Any of these third parties may terminate their engagements with us or be unable to fulfill their contractual obligations. If we need to enter into alternative arrangements, it would delay our product development activities.

Current wording

We currently rely and expect to continue to rely on third parties, such as CROs, CDMOs, clinical data management organizations, clinical data assessments and analysis organizations, medical institutions and clinical investigators, to conduct some aspects of our manufacturing, research, preclinical testing and clinical trials. Any of these third parties may terminate their engagements with us or be unable to fulfill their contractual obligations. If we need to enter into alternative arrangements, it would delay our product development activities.

Previous wording

Certain Chinese biotechnology companies, CROs and contract development and manufacturing organizations may become subject to trade restrictions, sanctions, other regulatory requirements, or proposed legislation by the U.S. government, which could potentially impact services available for our research and development or our ability to secure the materials we need for our product candidates. For example, if such laws or restrictions are passed, they would have the potential to severely restrict the ability of U.S. biopharmaceutical companies like us to purchase services or products from, collaborate with, or otherwise work with certain Chinese biotechnology companies without losing the ability to contract with, or otherwise receive funding from, the U.S. government. It is possible that some of our contractual counterparties could be impacted by the legislation described above. Such counterparties may be subject to U.S. legislation, sanctions, trade restrictions and other foreign regulatory requirements which could increase the cost or reduce the supply of material available to us, delay the procurement or supply of such material or have an adverse effect on our ability to secure significant commitments from governments to purchase our potential therapies. Such disruption could have adverse effects on the development of our product candidates.

Current wording

Certain Chinese biotechnology companies, CROs and contract development and manufacturing organizations may become subject to trade restrictions, sanctions, other regulatory requirements, or proposed legislation by the U.S. government, which could potentially impact services available for our research and development or our ability to secure the materials we need for our product candidates. For example, the U.S. BIOSECURE Act, which was enacted in December 2025, prohibits federal agencies from procuring or using any biotechnology equipment or services from “biotechnology companies of concern”, or entering into, extending, or renewing any contracts with entities that use such biotechnology equipment or services from “biotechnology companies of concern”. Congress has interpreted a “biotechnology company of concern” as an entity that is under the control of a foreign adversary and that poses a risk to national security based on its research or multiomic data collection (e.g., collection of genomic information). While the U.S. BIOSECURE Act has a grandfathering period of five years for existing contracts, and has carveouts for manufacture of drugs for supply under Medicaid and Medicare Part B, subject to the Secretary of Veteran Affairs’ discretion, the impact of the U.S. BIOSECURE Act on the biotechnology industry is uncertain. If the Chinese or other foreign CROs and CDMOs we rely on become subject to trade restrictions, sanctions, increased tariffs or other regulatory requirements by the U.S. government (including designation as a “biotechnology company of concern” under the U.S. BIOSECURE Act), or if the U.S. or Chinese government take retaliatory actions due to recent or increased tensions between the U.S. and China, it may have the potential to severely restrict the ability of U.S. biopharmaceutical companies like us to purchase services or products from, or otherwise collaborate with, certain “biotechnology companies of concern” without losing the ability to contract with, or otherwise receive funding from, the U.S. government. It is possible that some of our contractual counterparties could be impacted by the legislation described above. Such counterparties may be subject to U.S. legislation, sanctions, trade restrictions and other foreign regulatory requirements which could increase the cost or reduce the supply of material available to us, delay the procurement or supply of such material or have an adverse effect on our ability to secure significant commitments from governments to purchase our potential therapies. Such disruption could have adverse effects on the development of our product candidates.

Previous wording

Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years after its first effective non-provisional filing date. Although various extensions may be available, the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, are limited. Even if patents covering our product candidates, proprietary technologies and their uses are obtained, once the patent life has expired, we may be open to competition. In addition, although upon issuance in the United States a patent’s life can be extended based on certain delays caused by the USPTO and clinical development, this extension can be reduced or eliminated based on certain delays caused by the patent applicant during patent prosecution. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. If we do not have sufficient patent life to protect our product candidates, proprietary technologies and their uses, our business would be seriously harmed.

Current wording

Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years after its first effective non-provisional filing date. Although various extensions may be available, the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, are limited. Even if patents covering our product candidates, proprietary technologies and their uses are obtained, once the patent life has expired, we may be open to competition. In addition, although upon issuance in the United States a patent’s life can be extended based on certain delays caused by the USPTO and clinical development, this extension can be reduced or eliminated based on certain delays caused by the patent applicant during patent prosecution. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized.

Previous wording

Act includes a number of significant changes to the U.S. patent law. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. In particular, under the Leahy-Smith Act, the United States transitioned in March 2013 to a “first to file” system in which the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent. Third parties are allowed to submit prior art before the issuance of a patent by the USPTO, and may become involved in post-grant proceedings including opposition, derivation, reexamination, inter partes review or interference proceedings challenging our patent rights or the patent rights of others. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation could reduce the scope or enforceability of, or invalidate, our patent rights, which could adversely affect our competitive position. This could have a negative impact on some of our intellectual property and could increase uncertainties surrounding obtaining and enforcement or defense of our issued patents. In addition, Congress may pass patent reform legislation that is unfavorable to us. The Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on decisions by Congress, the federal courts and the USPTO, 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 we might obtain in the future. Similarly, statutory or judicial changes to the patent laws of other countries may increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of patent applications and the enforcement or defense of issued patents. Complying with these laws and regulations could limit our ability to obtain new patents in the future that may be important for our business.

Current wording

On September 16, 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“Leahy-Smith Act”) was signed into law. There remains many subsisting issued patents and some pending patent applications in the U.S. that were filed prior to its enactment and are therefore subject to the pre-Leahy-Smith Act U.S. patent laws and that may have relevance to our freedom-to-operate or ability to obtain patent issuances. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to the U.S. patent law. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. In particular, under the Leahy-Smith Act, the United States transitioned in March 2013 to a “first to file” system in which the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent. Third parties are allowed to submit prior art before the issuance of a patent by the USPTO, and may become involved in post-grant proceedings including opposition, derivation, reexamination, inter partes review or interference proceedings challenging our patent rights or the patent rights of others. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation could reduce the scope or enforceability of, or invalidate, our patent rights, which could adversely affect our competitive position. This could have a negative impact on some of our intellectual property and could increase uncertainties surrounding obtaining and enforcement or defense of our issued patents. In addition, Congress may pass patent reform legislation that is unfavorable to us. The Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on decisions by Congress, the federal courts and the USPTO, 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 we might obtain in the future. Similarly, statutory or judicial changes to the patent laws of other countries may increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of patent applications and the enforcement or defense of issued patents. Complying with these laws and regulations could limit our ability to obtain new patents in the future that may be important for our business.

Previous wording

Additionally, on June 1, 2023, the European Union Patent Package (EU Patent Package) regulations were implemented with the goal of providing a single pan-European Unitary Patent and a new European Unified Patent Court (UPC) for litigation involving European patents. As a result, all European patents, including those issued prior to ratification of the EU Patent Package, now by default automatically fall under the jurisdiction of the UPC. It is uncertain how the UPC will impact granted European patents in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries. Our European patent applications, if issued, could be challenged in the UPC. During the first seven years of the UPC’s existence, the UPC legislation allows a patent owner to opt its European patents out of the jurisdiction of the UPC. We may decide to opt out our future European patents from the UPC, but doing so may preclude us from realizing the benefits of the UPC. Moreover, if we do not meet all of the formalities and requirements for opt-out under the UPC, our future European patents could remain under the jurisdiction of the UPC. The UPC will provide our competitors with a new forum to centrally revoke our European patents, and allow for the possibility of a competitor to obtain pan-European injunction. 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.

Current wording

Additionally, on June 1, 2023, the European Union Patent Package (EU Patent Package) regulations were implemented with the goal of providing a single pan-European Unitary Patent and a new European Unified Patent Court (UPC) for litigation involving European patents. As a result, all European patents, including those issued prior to ratification of the EU Patent Package, now by default automatically fall under the jurisdiction of the UPC. Our European patent applications, if issued, could be challenged in the UPC. During the first seven years of the UPC’s existence, the UPC legislation allows a patent owner to opt its European patents out of the jurisdiction of the UPC. We may decide to opt out our future European patents from the UPC, but doing so may preclude us from realizing the benefits of the UPC. Moreover, if we do not meet all of the formalities and requirements for opt-out under the UPC, our future European patents could remain under the jurisdiction of the UPC. The UPC will provide our competitors with a new forum to centrally revoke our European patents, and allow for the possibility of a competitor to obtain a pan-European injunction. 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.