Tectonic Therapeutic, Inc.

Previous wording

Investing in the Company's common stock involves a high degree of risk. Careful consideration should be given to the following risk factors, in addition to the other information set forth in this Quarterly Report and in other documents that were filed and will be filed with the SEC, in evaluating the Company and its business. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to or that are currently seen as immaterial may also harm Company's business. If any of these risks occur, business, growth prospects, operating results and financial condition could be materially and adversely affected, the trading price of the Company's common stock could decline, and investors could lose part or all of their investment.

Current wording

Investing in the Company’s common stock involves a high degree of risk. Careful consideration should be given to the following risk factors, in addition to the other information set forth in this Quarterly Report and in other documents that were filed and will be filed with the SEC, in evaluating the Company and its business. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to or that are currently seen as immaterial may also harm the Company’s business. If any of these risks occur, business, growth prospects, operating results and financial condition could be materially and adversely affected, the trading price of the Company’s common stock could decline, and investors could lose part or all of their investment.

Previous wording

We are a biotechnology company with a limited operating history. Since our inception in 2019, we have invested most of our resources in organizing and staffing our company, developing our technology and product candidates, building our intellectual property portfolio, conducting business planning, raising capital and providing general and administrative support for these operations. Consequently, we have no meaningful operations upon which to evaluate our business, and predictions about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a longer operating history or a history of successfully developing and commercializing drug products. We continue to incur significant research and clinical development and other expenses related to our ongoing operations. As a result, we are not profitable and have incurred losses in each period since our inception. For the three months ended March 31, 2026 and 2025, we reported a net loss of $25.2 million and $15.9 million, respectively. As of March 31, 2026, we had an accumulated deficit of $248.0 million. We expect to continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future, and expect these losses to increase as we continue our research and development of, and seek regulatory approvals for, our lead product candidates, TX45 and TX2100, along with any future product candidates we may develop.

Current wording

We are a biotechnology company with a limited operating history. Since our inception in 2019, we have invested most of our resources in organizing and staffing our company, developing our technology and product candidates, building our intellectual property portfolio, conducting business planning, raising capital and providing general and administrative support for these operations. Consequently, we have no meaningful operations upon which to evaluate our business, and predictions about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a longer operating history or a history of successfully developing and commercializing drug products. We continue to incur significant research and clinical development and other expenses related to our ongoing operations. As a result, we are not profitable and have incurred losses in each period since our inception. For the three months ended June 30, 2026 and 2025, we reported a net loss of $22.3 million and $20.0 million, respectively. As of June 30, 2026, we had an accumulated deficit of $270.3 million. We expect to continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future, and expect these losses to increase as we continue our research and development of, and seek regulatory approvals for, our lead product candidates, TX45 and TX2100, along with any future product candidates we may develop.

Previous wording

As of March 31, 2026, we had $236.9 million in cash and cash equivalents. Although we believe that our available cash and cash equivalents will be sufficient to fund our planned operations for at least 12 months following the date of our condensed consolidated financial statements included in this Quarterly Report, this belief is based on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could use our available capital resources sooner than we currently expect.

Current wording

As of June 30, 2026, we had $227.1 million in cash and cash equivalents. Although we believe that our available cash and cash equivalents will be sufficient to fund our planned operations for at least 12 months following the date of our condensed consolidated financial statements included in this Quarterly Report, this belief is based on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could use our available capital resources sooner than we currently expect.

Previous wording

Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of our product candidates, we must conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the product candidates in humans. We are early in our product candidate development efforts, as TX45 is still in Phase 2 clinical trials and TX2100 has just entered a Phase 1a clinical trial.

Current wording

Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of our product candidates, we must conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the product candidates in humans. We are early in our product candidate development efforts, as TX45 is still in Phase 2 clinical trials and TX2100 is currently in a Phase 1a clinical trial.

Previous wording

To date, we have completed the Phase 1a trial in normal healthy volunteers and Phase 1b in patients with Group 2 Pulmonary Hypertension associated with HFrEF and HFpEF for TX45. We may experience delays in our ongoing clinical trials or preclinical studies. Additionally, we do not know whether planned clinical trials will begin on time, need to be redesigned, enroll patients on time, have sufficient drug supply for our product candidates on a timely basis or be completed on schedule, if at all. Furthermore, our product candidate TX2100 has just entered Phase 1a. A failure of one or more clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing, and our ongoing and future clinical trials may not be successful. We also may experience numerous unforeseen events during our clinical trials that could delay or prevent our ability to receive marketing approval or commercialize TX45, TX2100 or any future product candidates, including:

Current wording

To date, we have completed the Phase 1a trial in normal healthy volunteers and Phase 1b in patients with Group 2 Pulmonary Hypertension associated with HFrEF and HFpEF for TX45. We may experience delays in our ongoing clinical trials or preclinical studies. Additionally, we do not know whether planned clinical trials will begin on time, need to be redesigned, enroll patients on time, have sufficient drug supply for our product candidates on a timely basis or be completed on schedule, if at all. Furthermore, our product candidate TX2100 is currently in a Phase 1a trial. A failure of one or more clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing, and our ongoing and future clinical trials may not be successful. We also may experience numerous unforeseen events during our clinical trials that could delay or prevent our ability to receive marketing approval or commercialize TX45, TX2100 or any future product candidates, including:

Previous wording

We compete in the segments of the biotechnology, pharmaceutical and other related industries that develop and market therapies for the treatment of Group 2 PH, Group 3 PH-ILD, and Hereditary Hemorrhagic Telangiectasia (“HHT”) disorders. Although there are no other companies who have commercialized therapies for Group 2 PH or HHT, there are many other companies, including large biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, that are developing therapies for these therapeutic areas. For example, Merck and Tenax Therapeutics for the treatment of Group 2 PH and Diagonal Therapeutics, Atavistik, Terremoto, Vaderis Therapeutics and Alnylam Pharmaceuticals for the treatment of HHT. For PH-ILD, United Therapeutics and Liquidia have commercialized therapies, while Insmed, Gossamar, Pulmovant, Halo Biosciences and Foresee Pharmaceuticals are developing therapies for PH-ILD. In addition, in January 2025, Eli Lilly terminated its Phase 2 trial of volenrelaxin, and in February 2026 AstraZenca announced its Phase 2 clinical trial with AZD3427 for Group 2 PH was discontinued due to efficacy, which has affected investor perception of relaxin product candidates in general.

Current wording

We compete in the segments of the biotechnology, pharmaceutical and other related industries that develop and market therapies for the treatment of Group 2 PH, Group 3 PH-ILD, and Hereditary Hemorrhagic Telangiectasia (“HHT”) disorders. Although there are no other companies who have commercialized therapies for Group 2 PH or HHT, there are many other companies, including large biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, that are developing therapies for these therapeutic areas. For example, Merck and Tenax Therapeutics for the treatment of Group 2 PH and Diagonal Therapeutics, Atavistik, Terremoto, Vaderis Therapeutics and Alnylam Pharmaceuticals for the treatment of HHT. For PH-ILD, United Therapeutics and Liquidia have commercialized therapies, while Insmed, Gossamar, Pulmovant, Halo Biosciences and Foresee Pharmaceuticals are developing therapies for PH-ILD. In addition, in January 2025, Eli Lilly terminated its Phase 2 trial of volenrelaxin, and in February 2026 AstraZeneca announced its Phase 2 clinical trial with AZD3427 for Group 2 PH was discontinued due to lack of efficacy. AstraZeneca is also developing AZD5462, an oral RXFP1 agonist targeting the same relaxin pathway, which completed a Phase 2b trial in patients with chronic heart failure in February 2026, with results not yet reported, which may have affected investor perception of relaxin product candidates in general.

Previous wording

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

Current wording

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

Previous wording

The regulations that govern marketing approvals, pricing and reimbursement for new drug products vary widely from country to country. Current and future legislation may significantly change the approval requirements in ways that could involve additional costs and cause delays in obtaining approvals. In many regions, including the EU, Japan and Canada, the pricing of prescription drugs is controlled by the government and some countries require approval of the sale price of a drug before it can be marketed. In many countries, the pricing review period begins after regulatory approval for the product is granted. Regulatory agencies in those countries could determine that the pricing for our products should be based on prices of other commercially available drugs for the same disease, rather than allowing us to market our products at a premium as new drugs. As a result, we might obtain marketing approval for a product in a particular country, but then be subject to price regulations that delay or limit commercial launch of the product, possibly for lengthy time periods, which could negatively impact the revenue we generate from the sale of the product in that particular country. In some foreign markets, prescription pharmaceutical pricing remains subject to continuing governmental control even after initial approval is granted. Adverse pricing limitations may hinder our ability to recoup our investment in one or more product candidates, even if our product candidates obtains marketing approval.

Current wording

The regulations that govern marketing approvals, pricing and reimbursement for new drug products vary widely from country to country. Current and future legislation may significantly change the approval requirements in ways that could involve additional costs and cause delays in obtaining approvals. In many regions, including the EU, Japan and Canada, the pricing of prescription drugs is controlled by the government and some countries require approval of the sale price of a drug before it can be marketed. In many countries, the pricing review period begins after regulatory approval for the product is granted. Regulatory agencies in those countries could determine that the pricing for our products should be based on prices of other commercially available drugs for the same disease, rather than allowing us to market our products at a premium as new drugs. As a result, we might obtain marketing approval for a product in a particular country, but then be subject to price regulations that delay or limit commercial launch of the product, possibly for lengthy time periods, which could negatively impact the revenue we generate from the sale of the product in that particular country. In some foreign markets, prescription pharmaceutical pricing remains subject to continuing governmental control even after initial approval is granted. Adverse pricing limitations may hinder our ability to recoup our investment in one or more product candidates, even if our product candidates obtain marketing approval.

Previous wording

Our commercial success also depends on coverage and adequate reimbursement of our product candidates by third-party payors, including government payors, private health insurers, health maintenance organizations and other organizations, which may be difficult or time-consuming to obtain, may be limited in scope and may not be obtained in all jurisdictions in which we may seek to market our products. In the United States and markets in other countries, governments and private insurers closely examine medical products to determine whether they should be covered by reimbursement and, if so, the level of reimbursement that will apply. In the United States, the principal decisions about reimbursement for new medicines are typically made by the CMS an agency within the HHS. 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. Government authorities and other third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular drugs. For example, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, imposes rebates on many Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D products to penalize price increases that outpace inflation on an annual basis. HHS has also been empowered to negotiate the price of certain single-source biologics that have been on the market for at least eleven (11) years covered under Medicare as part of the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Each year up to twenty (20) products will be selected by HHS for the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Products subject to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program are expected to experience a significant reduction in reimbursement from the Medicare program on a per unit basis. Increasingly, third-party payors are requiring that drug companies provide them with predetermined discounts from list prices and are challenging the prices charged for drug products. We cannot be sure that coverage and reimbursement will be available for any product that we or our partners commercialize and, if reimbursement is available, what the level of reimbursement will be. Coverage and reimbursement may impact the demand for, or the price of, any product candidate for which we or our partners obtain regulatory approval. If coverage and reimbursement are not available or reimbursement is available only to limited levels, we and our partners may not be able to successfully commercialize any product candidate for which marketing approval is obtained.

Current wording

Our commercial success also depends on coverage and adequate reimbursement of our product candidates by third-party payors, including government payors, private health insurers, health maintenance organizations and other organizations, which may be difficult or time-consuming to obtain, may be limited in scope and may not be obtained in all jurisdictions in which we may seek to market our products. In the United States and markets in other countries, governments and private insurers closely examine medical products to determine whether they should be covered by reimbursement and, if so, the level of reimbursement that will apply. In the United States, the principal decisions about reimbursement for new medicines are typically made by CMS an agency within HHS. 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. Government authorities and other third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular drugs. For example, HHS imposes rebates on many Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D products to penalize price increases that outpace inflation on an annual basis. HHS has also been empowered to negotiate the price of certain single-source biologics that have been on the market for at least eleven (11) years covered under Medicare as part of the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Each year up to twenty (20) products will be selected by HHS for the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Products subject to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program are expected to experience a significant reduction in reimbursement from the Medicare program on a per unit basis. Increasingly, third-party payors are requiring that drug companies provide them with predetermined discounts from list prices and are challenging the prices charged for drug products. We cannot be sure that coverage and reimbursement will be available for any product that we or our partners commercialize and, if reimbursement is available, what the level of reimbursement will be. Coverage and reimbursement may impact the demand for, or the price of, any product candidate for which we or our partners obtain regulatory approval. If coverage and reimbursement are not available or reimbursement is available only to limited levels, we and our partners may not be able to successfully commercialize any product candidate for which marketing approval is obtained.

Previous wording

There may be significant delays in obtaining coverage and reimbursement for newly approved drugs, and coverage may be more limited than the purposes for which the drug is approved by the FDA or comparable foreign health authorities. Moreover, eligibility for coverage and reimbursement does not imply that a drug will be paid for in all cases or at a rate that covers our costs, including costs of research, development, manufacture, sale and distribution. Interim reimbursement levels for new drugs, if applicable, may also not be sufficient to cover our costs and may only be temporary. Reimbursement rates may vary according to the use of the drug and the clinical setting in which it is used, may be based on reimbursement levels already set for lower cost drugs and may be incorporated into existing payments for other services. Net prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payors and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the United States. In addition, many pharmaceutical manufacturers must calculate and report certain price reporting metrics to the government, such as average sales price and best price. Penalties may apply in some cases when such metrics are not submitted accurately and timely. Further, these prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs. Our inability to promptly obtain coverage and profitable reimbursement rates from both government-funded and private payors for any approved products that we develop could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, ability to raise capital needed to commercialize products and overall financial condition.

Current wording

There may be significant delays in obtaining coverage and reimbursement for newly approved drugs, and coverage may be more limited than the purposes for which the drug is approved by the FDA or comparable foreign health authorities. Moreover, eligibility for coverage and reimbursement does not imply that a drug will be paid for in all cases or at a rate that covers our costs, including costs of research, development, manufacture, sale and distribution. Interim reimbursement levels for new drugs, if applicable, may also not be sufficient to cover our costs and may only be temporary. Reimbursement rates may vary according to the use of the drug and the clinical setting in which it is used, may be based on reimbursement levels already set for lower cost drugs and may be incorporated into existing payments for other services. Net prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payors and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the United States. In addition, many pharmaceutical manufacturers must calculate and report certain price reporting metrics to the government, such as average sales price and best price. Penalties may apply in some cases when such metrics are not submitted accurately and timely. Our inability to promptly obtain coverage and profitable reimbursement rates from both government-funded and private payors for any approved products that we develop could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, ability to raise capital needed to commercialize products and overall financial condition.

Previous wording

In addition to experiencing a security incident, third parties may gather, collect, or infer sensitive information about us from public sources, data brokers, or other means that reveal competitively sensitive details about the company and could be used to undermine our competitive advantage or market position. Additionally, sensitive information of ours could be leaked, disclosed, or revealed as a result of or in connection with our employees’, personnel’s, or vendors’ use of generative AI technologies.

Current wording

In addition to experiencing a security incident, third parties may gather, collect, or infer sensitive information about us from public sources, data brokers, or other means that reveal competitively sensitive details about the company and could be used to undermine our competitive advantage or market position.

Previous wording

Privacy and data security laws in the United States at the federal, state and local level are increasingly complex and changing rapidly. For example, at the federal level, HIPAA, as amended by HITECH, imposes specific requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. Additionally, at the state level, the privacy and data protection landscape is changing rapidly. Many states have enacted comprehensive privacy laws that impose certain obligations on covered businesses, including providing specific disclosures in privacy notices and affording residents with certain rights concerning their personal data. As applicable, such rights may include the right to access, correct, or delete certain personal data, and to opt-out of certain data processing activities, such as targeted advertising, profiling, and automated decision-making. The exercise of these rights may impact our business and ability to provide our products and services if we become subject to these laws. For example, the California Consumer Rights Act (“CCPA”), as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (“CPRA”) applies to personal information data of consumers, business representatives, and employees who are California residents and requires businesses to provide specific disclosures in privacy notices and honor requests of such individuals to exercise certain rights concerning their personal data. The

Current wording

Privacy and data security laws in the United States at the federal, state and local level are increasingly complex and changing rapidly. For example, at the federal level, HIPAA, as amended by HITECH, imposes specific requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. Additionally, at the state level, the privacy and data protection landscape is changing rapidly. Many states have enacted comprehensive privacy laws that impose certain obligations on covered businesses, including providing specific disclosures in privacy notices and affording residents with certain rights concerning their personal data. As applicable, such rights may include the right to access, correct, or delete certain personal data, and to opt-out of certain data processing activities, such as targeted advertising, profiling, and automated decision-making. The exercise of these rights may impact our business and ability to provide our products and services if we become subject to these laws. For example, the California Consumer Rights Act (“CCPA”), as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (“CPRA”) applies to personal information data of consumers, business representatives, and employees who are California residents and requires businesses to provide specific disclosures in privacy notices and honor requests of such individuals to exercise certain rights concerning their personal data. The CCPA provides fines for noncompliance and a limited private right of action in connection with certain data breaches. While the

Previous wording

CCPA provides fines for noncompliance and a limited private right of action in connection with certain data breaches. While the CCPA and other state privacy laws contain an exemption for certain personal information processed in connection with clinical trials, , these developments further complicate compliance efforts, and increase legal risk and compliance costs for us and the third parties with whom we work. Similar laws have been passed or are being considered in several other states, as well as at the federal and local levels. The evolving patchwork of differing state and federal privacy and data security laws increases the cost and complexity of operating our business and increases our exposure to liability, including from third party litigation and regulatory investigations, enforcement, fines, and penalties.

Current wording

CCPA and other state privacy laws contain an exemption for certain personal information processed in connection with clinical trials, these developments further complicate compliance efforts, and increase legal risk and compliance costs for us and the third parties with whom we work. Similar laws have been passed or are being considered in several other states, as well as at the federal and local levels. The evolving patchwork of differing state and federal privacy and data security laws increases the cost and complexity of operating our business and increases our exposure to liability, including from third party litigation and regulatory investigations, enforcement, fines, and penalties.

Previous wording

Our amended and restated bylaws provide that, unless we consent in writing to an alternative forum, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the sole and exclusive forum for any state law claim for (1) any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf; (2) any action asserting a claim of breach of or based on a fiduciary duty owed by any of our current or former directors, officers or other employees to us or our stockholders; (3) any action asserting a claim against us or any of our current or former directors, officers, employees or stockholders arising pursuant to any provision of the DGCL, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or our amended and restated bylaws; or (4) any action asserting a claim governed by the internal affairs doctrine, or 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 AVROBIO consents in writing to an alternative forum, the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts will be the exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act, or the Federal Forum Provision, as our principal executive offices are located in Watertown, Massachusetts. 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 foregoing 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 U.S. federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder.

Current wording

Our amended and restated bylaws provide that, unless we consent in writing to an alternative forum, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the sole and exclusive forum for any state law claim for (1) any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf; (2) any action asserting a claim of breach of or based on a fiduciary duty owed by any of our current or former directors, officers or other employees to us or our stockholders; (3) any action asserting a claim against us or any of our current or former directors, officers, employees or stockholders arising pursuant to any provision of the DGCL, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or our amended and restated bylaws; or (4) any action asserting a claim governed by the internal affairs doctrine, or 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 an alternative forum, the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts will be the exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act, or the Federal Forum Provision, as our principal executive offices are located in Watertown, Massachusetts. 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 foregoing Delaware Forum Provision and the