Xilio Therapeutics, Inc.

Previous wording

As of March 31, 2026, we had cash and cash equivalents of $150.3 million. In the second quarter of 2026, we achieved a $6.0 million development milestone related to the collaboration agreement with AbbVie Group Holdings Limited, or AbbVie. Based on our current operating plans, we anticipate that our existing cash and cash equivalents as of March 31, 2026, together with the development milestone achieved under the AbbVie collaboration in the second quarter of 2026, will be sufficient to enable us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements into early 2028. This estimate excludes any potential additional milestone payments, option-related fees or other contingent payments under our existing collaboration and partnership agreements with AbbVie and Gilead Sciences, Inc., or Gilead, and excludes the potential receipt of up to $36.2 million in additional gross proceeds in the second half of 2026 if all outstanding Series C warrants are exercised at their current exercise price. In addition, we have based our estimates on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could exhaust our available capital resources sooner than we anticipate and may need to seek additional capital sooner than anticipated.

Current wording

As of June 30, 2026, we had cash and cash equivalents of $136.0 million. In the second quarter of 2026, we achieved a $6.0 million development milestone under our AbbVie collaboration, which we received in the third quarter of 2026. Based on our current operating plans, we anticipate that our existing cash and cash equivalents as of June 30, 2026, together with the $6.0 million development milestone achieved under our AbbVie collaboration in the second quarter of 2026, will be sufficient to enable us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements into the first quarter of 2028. This estimate excludes up to $36.2 million in additional gross proceeds in the second half of 2026 if all outstanding Series C warrants are exercised at their current exercise price and any potential additional milestone payments, option-related fees or other contingent payments under our collaboration and license agreements with AbbVie Group Holdings Limited, or AbbVie, and Gilead Sciences, Inc., or Gilead, including up to $31.0 million in near-term milestones and option extension fees that could be achieved under the AbbVie collaboration through the first half of 2027. In addition, we have based our estimates on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could exhaust our available capital resources sooner than we anticipate and may need to seek additional capital sooner than anticipated.

Previous wording

the scope, progress, results and costs of research and development for our current and future product candidates, including our current and planned clinical trials for our clinical-stage product candidates, vilastobart and efarindodekin alfa, and ongoing preclinical development for our current and future product candidates;

Current wording

the scope, progress, results and costs of research and development for our current and future product candidates, including our current and planned clinical trials for our clinical-stage product candidates, efarindodekin alfa and XTX501, and ongoing preclinical development for our current and future product candidates;

Previous wording

Since inception, we have incurred significant operating losses, including net losses of $9.5 million and $13.3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2026 and 2025, respectively and $35.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2025. As of March 31, 2026, we had an accumulated deficit of $428.3 million. We expect our operating losses and negative operating cash flows to continue for the foreseeable future as we continue to advance our pipeline of novel, masked immuno-oncology, or I-O, molecules through preclinical and clinical development, maintain the infrastructure necessary to support these activities and continue to incur costs associated with operating as a public company. We do not expect to generate any revenue from the sale of products for a number of years, if at all, and any such revenue will not be realized unless and until we obtain marketing approval for and successfully launch and commercialize a product candidate. If we obtain marketing approval for any current or future product candidates that we develop, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to product sales, marketing, distribution and manufacturing. Some of these expenses may be incurred in advance of marketing approval and could be substantial.

Current wording

Since inception, we have incurred significant operating losses, including net losses of $15.9 million and $29.1 million for the six months ended June 30, 2026 and 2025, respectively, and $35.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2025. As of June 30, 2026, we had an accumulated deficit of $434.7 million. We expect our operating losses and negative operating cash flows to continue for the foreseeable future as we continue to advance our pipeline of novel, masked immuno-oncology, or I-O, molecules through preclinical and clinical development, maintain the infrastructure necessary to support these activities and continue to incur costs associated with operating as a public company. We do not expect to generate any revenue from the sale of products for a number of years, if at all, and any such revenue will not be realized unless and until we obtain marketing approval for and successfully launch and commercialize a product candidate. If we obtain marketing approval for any current or future product candidates that we develop, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to product sales, marketing, distribution and manufacturing. Some of these expenses may be incurred in advance of marketing approval and could be substantial.

Previous wording

In general, under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, and corresponding provisions of state law, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change” (generally defined as a greater than 50 percentage point change (by value) in the ownership of its equity by certain stockholders over a three-year period), the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change NOL carryforwards and other pre-change tax attributes to offset its post-change income is subject to limitations. We have experienced ownership changes as defined by Sections 382 and 383 of the Code. As a result of these changes and any future ownership changes, if we earn net taxable income, our ability to use our pre-change NOL carryforwards and other pre-change tax attributes to offset such taxable income may be subject to limitations, which could result in increased future tax liability to us and could have an adverse effect on our future results of operations.

Current wording

Even if we generate taxable income in the future, our ability to use our NOL carryforwards and tax attributes may nevertheless be limited. In general, under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, and corresponding provisions of state law, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change” (generally defined as a greater than 50 percentage point change (by value) in the ownership of its equity by certain stockholders over a three-year period), the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change NOL carryforwards and other pre-change tax attributes to offset its post-change income is subject to limitations. We have experienced ownership changes as defined by Sections 382 and 383 of the Code. As a result of these changes and any future ownership changes, if we earn net taxable income, our ability to use our pre-change NOL carryforwards and other pre-change tax attributes to offset such taxable income may be subject to limitations, which could result in increased future tax liability to us and could have an adverse effect on our future results of operations.

Previous wording

NOLs could expire or otherwise become unavailable to offset future income tax liabilities. As described below in “Risks Related to Ownership of Our Common Stock—Changes in tax laws or in their implementation or interpretation may adversely affect our business and financial condition,” the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, or the Tax Act, as amended by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, or the CARES Act, includes changes to U.S. federal tax rates and the rules governing NOL carryforwards that may significantly impact our ability to utilize our NOLs to offset taxable income in the future. In addition, state NOLs generated in one state cannot be used to offset income generated in another state. For these reasons, even if we attain profitability, we may be unable to use a material portion of our NOLs and other tax attributes.

Current wording

There is also a risk that due to regulatory changes, such as suspensions on the use of NOLs, or other unforeseen reasons, our existing NOLs could expire or otherwise become unavailable to offset future income tax liabilities. As described below in “Risks Related to Ownership of Our Common Stock—Changes in tax laws or in their implementation or interpretation may adversely affect our business and financial condition,” the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, or the Tax Act, as amended by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, or the CARES Act, includes changes to U.S. federal tax rates and the rules governing NOL carryforwards that may significantly impact our ability to utilize our NOLs to offset taxable income in the future. In addition, state NOLs generated in one state cannot be used to offset income generated in another state. For these reasons, even if we attain profitability, we may be unable to use a material portion of our NOLs and other tax attributes.

Previous wording

Our business and future success is highly dependent on our ability to obtain regulatory approval for, and if approved, successfully launch and commercialize, our current product candidates, including our clinical-stage, masked I-O product candidates: vilastobart and efarindodekin alfa. We are currently evaluating vilastobart in combination with atezolizumab (Tecentriq®) in an ongoing Phase 2 clinical trial in patients with microsatellite stable, or MSS, metastatic colorectal cancer, or mCRC, and we are currently evaluating efarindodekin alfa as a monotherapy in an ongoing Phase 2 clinical trial in patients with certain advanced solid tumors. We also have a portfolio of programs that are in earlier stages of development and may never advance to clinical-stage development, including XTX501, our bispecific PD-1/masked IL-2, which is designed to selectively stimulate PD-1 positive antigen-experienced T cells and enhance their function and is currently advancing in initial IND-enabling activities, and our wholly-owned preclinical programs for a multi-specific masked T cell engager targeting prostate-specific membrane antigen, or PSMA, and six-transmembrane epithelial antigen of prostate 1, or STEAP1, and a masked T cell engager targeting claudin 18.2, or CLDN18.2, as well as an additional masked T cell engager program in collaboration with AbbVie.

Current wording

Our business and future success is highly dependent on our ability to obtain regulatory approval for, and if approved, successfully launch and commercialize, our current or future product candidates, including our current clinical-stage product candidates, efarindodekin alfa and XTX501. We are currently evaluating efarindodekin alfa as a monotherapy in an ongoing Phase 2 clinical trial in patients with certain advanced solid tumors. For XTX501, we expect to initiate dosing in the Phase 1 trial in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer, or NSCLC, and select advanced solid tumors in the second half of 2026. We also have a portfolio of programs that are in earlier stages of development and may never advance to clinical-stage development, including our wholly-owned preclinical programs for a multi-specific masked T cell engager targeting PSMA+STEAP1, and a masked T cell engager targeting CLDN18.2 as well as an additional masked T cell engager program in collaboration with AbbVie.

Previous wording

To date, we have only had limited interactions with the FDA regarding our clinical development plans. We may experience issues surrounding preliminary trial execution, such as delays in FDA acceptance of any future INDs, revisions in trial design and finalization of trial protocols, difficulties with patient recruitment and enrollment, quality and provision of clinical supplies, or early safety signals.

Current wording

We may experience issues surrounding preliminary trial execution, such as delays in FDA acceptance of any future INDs, revisions in trial design and finalization of trial protocols, difficulties with patient recruitment and enrollment, quality and provision of clinical supplies, or early safety signals.

Previous wording

All our product candidates are still in the early clinical stage or preclinical stage of development, and their risk of failure is high. Before we can commence clinical trials for a product candidate, we must complete extensive preclinical testing and studies that support our planned INDs in the U.S., or similar applications in other jurisdictions. We cannot be certain of the timely completion or outcome of our preclinical testing and studies, and we cannot predict if the FDA or other regulatory authorities will accept our proposed clinical programs or if the outcome of our preclinical testing and studies will ultimately support the further development of our programs. As a result, we cannot be sure that we will be able to submit INDs or similar applications for our current or future preclinical programs, including without limitation, the planned IND for XTX501, on the timelines we expect, if at all, and we cannot be sure that submission of INDs or similar applications will result in the FDA or other regulatory authorities allowing clinical trials to begin.

Current wording

All our product candidates are still in the early clinical stage or preclinical stage of development, and their risk of failure is high. Before we can commence clinical trials for a product candidate, we must complete extensive preclinical testing and studies that support our planned INDs in the U.S., or similar applications in other jurisdictions. We cannot be certain of the timely completion or outcome of our preclinical testing and studies, and we cannot predict if the FDA or other regulatory authorities will accept our proposed clinical programs or if the outcome of our preclinical testing and studies will ultimately support the further development of our programs. As a result, we cannot be sure that we will be able to submit INDs or similar applications for our current or future preclinical programs, including without limitation, the planned INDs for our masked T cell engager programs targeting CLND18.2 and PSMA+STEAP1, on the timelines we expect, if at all, and we cannot be sure that submission of INDs or similar applications will result in the FDA or other regulatory authorities allowing clinical trials to begin.

Previous wording

The risk of failure for our current and any future product candidates is high. It is impossible to predict when or if any of our product candidates will successfully complete preclinical studies or clinical trials evaluating their safety and effectiveness in humans or will ultimately receive regulatory approval. To obtain the requisite regulatory approvals to market and sell any of our product candidates, we must demonstrate through extensive preclinical studies and clinical trials that our product candidates are safe and effective in humans for use in each target indication. Preclinical and clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and the outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the preclinical or clinical trial process. The outcome of preclinical testing and early clinical trials may not be predictive of the results of later clinical trials, and interim results of a clinical trial do not necessarily predict final results. In particular, while we have conducted certain preclinical studies for each of our clinical stage product candidates, we do not know whether these product candidates will perform in our clinical trials as they have performed in these prior preclinical studies. Similarly, there can be no assurance that early, interim or preliminary clinical data or results will be predictive of or replicated in future clinical data or results, including without limitation, data reported to date for our Phase 1/2 trial for vilastobart in combination with atezolizumab and our Phase 1 trial for efarindodekin alfa. Many companies in the biopharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in late-stage clinical trials after achieving positive results in early-stage development and we cannot be certain that we will not face similar setbacks. These setbacks have been caused by, among other things, preclinical findings made while clinical trials were underway, or safety or efficacy observations made in preclinical studies and clinical trials, including previously unreported adverse events, or AEs. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing approval of their products.

Current wording

The risk of failure for our current and any future product candidates is high. It is impossible to predict when or if any of our product candidates will successfully complete preclinical studies or clinical trials evaluating their safety and effectiveness in humans or will ultimately receive regulatory approval. To obtain the requisite regulatory approvals to market and sell any of our product candidates, we must demonstrate through extensive preclinical studies and clinical trials that our product candidates are safe and effective in humans for use in each target indication. Preclinical and clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and the outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the preclinical or clinical trial process. The outcome of preclinical testing and early clinical trials may not be predictive of the results of later clinical trials, and interim results of a clinical trial do not necessarily predict final results. In particular, while we have conducted certain preclinical studies for each of our clinical stage product candidates, we do not know whether these product candidates will perform in our clinical trials as they have performed in these prior preclinical studies. Similarly, there can be no assurance that early, interim or preliminary clinical data or results will be predictive of or replicated in future clinical data or results, including without limitation, the data reported to date for our Phase 1 clinical trial for efarindodekin alfa. Many companies in the biopharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in late-stage clinical trials after achieving positive results in early-stage development and we cannot be certain that we will not face similar setbacks. These setbacks have been caused by, among other things, preclinical findings made while clinical trials were underway, or safety or efficacy observations made in preclinical studies and clinical trials, including previously unreported adverse events, or AEs. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing approval of their products.

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 candidate for its intended indications. We cannot guarantee that any clinical trials, including our ongoing Phase 2 clinical trial evaluating vilastobart in combination with atezolizumab or our Phase 2 clinical trial evaluating efarindodekin alfa as a monotherapy, will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all. We may experience numerous unforeseen events leading up to, during or as a result of clinical trials that could delay or prevent the initiation or completion of a clinical trial or our ability to receive marketing approval or commercialize our product candidates, including:

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 candidate for its intended indications. We cannot guarantee that any clinical trials, including our Phase 2 clinical trial evaluating efarindodekin alfa as a monotherapy and our Phase 1/2 clinical trial to evaluate XTX501 in patients with NSCLC and select advanced solid tumors, will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all. We may experience numerous unforeseen events leading up to, during or as a result of clinical trials that could delay or prevent the initiation or completion of a clinical trial or our ability to receive marketing approval or commercialize our product candidates, including:

Previous wording

From time to time, we may publish interim top-line or preliminary data from our clinical trials. For example, we most recently reported updated data from our Phase 2 clinical trial for vilastobart in combination with atezolizumab and from our Phase 1 clinical trial for efarindodekin alfa in November 2025 at the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) 40 th Annual Meeting. Preliminary and interim data from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available. Preliminary or “top-line” data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data previously published. As a result, interim and preliminary data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. Adverse differences between preliminary or interim data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects.

Current wording

From time to time, we may publish interim top-line or preliminary data from our clinical trials. For example, we most recently reported data from our Phase 1 clinical trial for efarindodekin alfa in November 2025 at the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) 40 th Annual Meeting. Preliminary and interim data from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available. Preliminary or “top-line” data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data previously published. As a result, interim and preliminary data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. Adverse differences between preliminary or interim data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects.

Previous wording

We intend to develop our clinical-stage product candidates, and likely other future product candidates, in combination with third-party cancer drugs, which may be either approved or unapproved. For example, we are currently evaluating vilastobart in combination with atezolizumab (Tecentriq®) in a Phase 2 clinical trial in patients with MSS mCRC. Our ability to develop and ultimately commercialize our current product candidates, and any future product candidates, used in combination with third-party drugs will depend on our ability to access such drugs on commercially reasonable terms for clinical trials and their availability for use with our commercialized product, if approved. We cannot be certain that current or potential future commercial relationships will provide us with a steady supply of such drugs on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Any failure to maintain or enter into new successful commercial relationships, or the expense of purchasing such third-party drugs in the market, may delay our development timelines, increase our costs and jeopardize our ability to develop our current product candidates and any future product candidates as commercially viable therapies. If any of these occur, our business, financial condition, operating results or prospects may be materially harmed.

Current wording

We intend to develop our clinical-stage product candidates, and likely other future product candidates, in combination with third-party cancer drugs, which may be either approved or unapproved. Our ability to develop and ultimately commercialize our current product candidates, and any future product candidates, used in combination with third-party drugs will depend on our ability to access such drugs on commercially reasonable terms for clinical trials and their availability for use with our commercialized product, if approved. We cannot be certain that current or potential future commercial relationships will provide us with a steady supply of such drugs on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Any failure to maintain or enter into new successful commercial relationships, or the expense of purchasing such third-party drugs in the market, may delay our development timelines, increase our costs and jeopardize our ability to develop our current product candidates and any future product candidates as commercially viable therapies. If any of these occur, our business, financial condition, operating results or prospects may be materially harmed.

Previous wording

The success of our business depends primarily upon our ability to discover, develop and commercialize products based on our technological approaches. While we have had favorable preclinical and early clinical results related to our clinical-stage product candidates, vilastobart and efarindodekin alfa, we have not yet succeeded and may not succeed in demonstrating efficacy and safety for any product candidates in current or future clinical trials or in obtaining marketing approval thereafter. We rely on matrix metalloproteases, or MMPs, to activate our molecules within the tumor microenvironment. If MMP activity in human tumors is not sufficient to cleave the masking protein domain, the potential efficacy of our product candidates would be limited. We have no assurance that our product candidates will successfully progress through clinical development and ultimately marketing approval. We have invested substantially all of our efforts and financial resources in developing our initial product candidates and our future success is highly dependent on the outcome of our ongoing clinical trials and the successful development of our technology and product candidates.

Current wording

The success of our business depends primarily upon our ability to discover, develop and commercialize products based on our technological approaches. While we have had favorable preclinical and early clinical results related to certain of our clinical-stage product candidates, we have not yet succeeded and may not succeed in demonstrating efficacy and safety for any product candidates in current or future clinical trials or in obtaining marketing approval thereafter. We rely on matrix metalloproteases, or MMPs, and other tumor-specific proteases to activate our molecules within the tumor microenvironment. If protease activity in human tumors is not sufficient to cleave the masking protein domain, the potential efficacy of our product candidates would be limited. We have no assurance that our product candidates will successfully progress through clinical development and ultimately marketing approval. We have invested substantially all of our efforts and financial resources in developing our initial product candidates and our future success is highly dependent on the outcome of our ongoing clinical trials and the successful development of our technology and product candidates.

Previous wording

We have relied on WuXi Biologics in China to manufacture and supply certain raw materials used in our product candidates, and we expect to continue to use WuXi Biologics as our CDMO for such purposes. A natural disaster, epidemic or pandemic, such as the COVID‑19 pandemic, trade war, political unrest, economic conditions, changes in legislation, including the passage of the People’s Republic of China Biosecurity law, which became effective on April 15, 2021, and subsequent legislation that China or the U.S. may adopt in the future, or other events in China could disrupt our ability to continue to rely upon CROs, CDMOs, collaborators, manufacturers or other third parties with whom we conduct business now or in the future. For example, in December 2025, the BIOSECURE Act was signed into law as part of the Fiscal Year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act. Under the BIOSECURE Act, U.S. government agencies cannot (i) buy or obtain biotechnology equipment or services provided by biotechnology companies of concern, or BCCs; (ii) enter into, extend, or renew a contract with any entity using biotechnology equipment or services provided by a BCC to perform a government contract; or (iii) expend loan or grant funds for biotechnology equipment or services provided by a

Current wording

We have relied on WuXi Biologics in China to manufacture and supply certain raw materials used in our product candidates, and we expect to continue to use WuXi Biologics as our CDMO for such purposes. A natural disaster, epidemic or pandemic, such as the COVID‑19 pandemic, trade war, political unrest, economic conditions, changes in legislation, including the passage of the People’s Republic of China Biosecurity law, which became effective on April 15, 2021, and subsequent legislation that China or the U.S. may adopt in the future, or other events in China could disrupt our ability to continue to rely upon CROs, CDMOs, collaborators, manufacturers or other third parties with whom we conduct business now or in the future. For example, in December 2025, the BIOSECURE Act was signed into law as part of the Fiscal Year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act. Under the BIOSECURE Act, U.S. government agencies cannot (i) buy or obtain biotechnology equipment or services provided by biotechnology companies of concern, or BCCs; (ii) enter into, extend, or renew a contract with any entity using biotechnology equipment or services provided by a BCC to perform a government contract; or (iii) expend loan or grant funds for biotechnology equipment or services provided by a BCC, whether directly or through a loan or grant recipient. The BIOSECURE Act does not name specific companies as BCCs but treats any company on the Department of Defense/War 1260H list of “Chinese military companies” as a BCC. The 1260H list was updated by the Department of Defense in January 2024 and January 2025. Subsequently, on June 8, 2026, the Department of Defense/War released an updated version of the 1260H list, which included WuXi AppTec, along with two other biotechnology companies (Complete Genomics and Novogene). WuXi AppTec has challenged its designation as a Chinese military company and litigation remains ongoing. Since WuXi AppTec was just added to the list, it will be covered under a five-year grandfather clause that allows any contracts signed before the effective date of the ban to be protected through 2031. Moreover, while WuXi Biologics was originally the biologics division of WuXi AppTec, they are now operationally independent companies. As a result, we do not expect the recent 1260H listing of WuXi AppTec to impact WuXi Biologics and the services it currently provides to us. Nonetheless, the U.S. government has authority to add additional entities of concern to the 1260H list, and there is a risk that such a future listing could include WuXi Biologics.

Previous wording

Any disruption in China or the U.S. that significantly impacts WuXi Biologics or other third parties with whom we conduct business now or in the future, including CROs that provide services for our research and development programs, or manufacturers that produce and export raw or manufactured materials in adequate quantities to meet our needs, could impair our ability to operate our business on a day-to-day basis and impede, delay, limit or prevent the research, development or commercialization of our current and future products or product candidates. In addition, for any activities conducted in China, we are exposed to the possibility of product supply disruption and increased costs in the event of changes in the policies of the U.S. or Chinese governments, political unrest or unstable economic or geopolitical conditions, including sanctions in China or against certain Chinese companies; changes in U.S. export laws or the imposition by the U.S. of trade barriers; sanctions; limitations on uses of U.S. government executive agency contract, grant or loan funds; or other restrictions on doing business with certain Chinese companies, including WuXi Biologics, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. Additionally, we may be exposed to fluctuations in the value of the local currency in China for goods and services. Our costs for any of these services or activities could also increase as a result of future appreciation of the local currency in China or increased labor costs if the demand for skilled laborers increases and/or the availability of skilled labor declines in China.

Current wording

Any disruption in China or the U.S. that significantly impacts WuXi Biologics, WuXi AppTec or other third parties with whom we conduct business now or in the future, including CROs that provide services for our research and development programs, or manufacturers that produce and export raw or manufactured materials in adequate quantities to meet our needs, could impair our ability to operate our business on a day-to-day basis and impede, delay, limit or prevent the research, development or commercialization of our current and future products or product candidates. In addition, for any activities conducted in China, we are exposed to the possibility of product supply disruption and increased costs in the event of changes in the policies of the U.S. or Chinese governments, political unrest or unstable economic or geopolitical conditions, including sanctions in China or against certain Chinese companies; changes in U.S. export laws or the imposition by the U.S. of trade barriers; sanctions; limitations on uses of U.S. government executive agency contract, grant or loan funds; or other restrictions on doing business with certain Chinese companies, including WuXi Biologics, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. Additionally, we may be exposed to fluctuations in the value of the local currency in China for goods and services. Our costs for any of these services or activities could also increase as a result of future appreciation of the local currency in China or increased labor costs if the demand for skilled laborers increases and/or the availability of skilled labor declines in China.

Previous wording

We expect to rely on third parties, including but not limited to, CROs and research and clinical trial sites to ensure our IND-enabling studies and clinical trials are conducted properly and on time, and we expect to rely in the future on third-party vendors for additional research programs as well as other functions. While we will have agreements governing their activities, we will have limited influence over their actual performance. We will control only certain aspects of our third-party vendors’ activities. Nevertheless, we will be responsible for ensuring that each of these studies is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards, and our reliance on the third-party vendors does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities.

Current wording

We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties, including but not limited to, CROs and research and clinical trial sites to ensure our IND-enabling studies and clinical trials are conducted properly and on time, and we expect to rely in the future on third-party vendors for additional research programs as well as other functions. While we will have agreements governing their activities, we will have limited influence over their actual performance. We will control only certain aspects of our third-party vendors’ activities. Nevertheless, we will be responsible for ensuring that each of these studies is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards, and our reliance on the third-party vendors does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities.

Previous wording

If our current or future collaborations, licenses or similar transactions do not result in the successful development and commercialization of product candidates, including if one of our current or future collaborators or licensors terminates its agreement with us, we may not receive any future payments for which we might otherwise be eligible under such agreement or we may incur significant costs in re-establishing the development and manufacturing of such product candidates. If we do not receive the funding we expect under these agreements, our development of product candidates could be delayed, and we may need additional resources to develop such product candidates. In addition, if one of our collaborators terminates its agreement with us, we may find it more difficult to find a suitable replacement collaborator or licensor or for us to attract new collaborators or licensors, and our development programs may be delayed or the perception of us in the business and financial communities could be adversely affected. All of the risks relating to product development, regulatory approval and commercialization described in this Annual Report on Form 10-K apply to the activities of our collaborators or licensors.

Current wording

If our current or future collaborations, licenses or similar transactions do not result in the successful development and commercialization of product candidates, including if one of our current or future collaborators or licensors terminates its agreement with us, we may not receive any future payments for which we might otherwise be eligible under such agreement or we may incur significant costs in re-establishing the development and manufacturing of such product candidates. If we do not receive the funding we expect under these agreements, our development of product candidates could be delayed, and we may need additional resources to develop such product candidates. In addition, if one of our collaborators terminates its agreement with us, we may find it more difficult to find a suitable replacement collaborator or licensor or for us to attract new collaborators or licensors, and our development programs may be delayed or the perception of us in the business and financial communities could be adversely affected. All of the risks relating to product development, regulatory approval and commercialization described in this “Risk Factors” section apply to the activities of our collaborators or licensors.

Previous wording

We are developing our most advanced clinical-stage, masked I-O product candidates for the treatment of cancer and have not completed clinical development or received marketing approval for either vilastobart or efarindodekin alfa. There are already a variety of available therapies marketed for cancer and some of the currently approved therapies are branded and subject to patent protection, and others are available on a generic basis. Many of these approved therapies are well-established and widely accepted by physicians, patients and third-party payors. Insurers and other third-party payors may also encourage the use of generic products. We expect that if our product candidates are approved, they will be priced at a significant premium over competitive generic products. This may make it difficult for us to achieve our business strategy of using our product candidates in combination with existing therapies or replacing existing therapies with our product candidates. Competition may further increase with advances in the commercial applicability of technologies and greater availability of capital for investment in these industries.

Current wording

We are developing our clinical-stage product candidates for the treatment of cancer and have not completed clinical development or received marketing approval for any of our product candidates. There are already a variety of available therapies marketed for cancer and some of the currently approved therapies are branded and subject to patent protection, and others are available on a generic basis. Many of these approved therapies are well-established and widely accepted by physicians, patients and third-party payors. Insurers and other third-party payors may also encourage the use of generic products. We expect that if our product candidates are approved, they will be priced at a significant premium over competitive generic products. This may make it difficult for us to achieve our business strategy of using our product candidates in combination with existing therapies or replacing existing therapies with our product candidates. Competition may further increase with advances in the commercial applicability of technologies and greater availability of capital for investment in these industries.

Previous wording

With respect to our masked T cell engager programs, currently there are no T cell engager therapies targeting PSMA, CLDN18.2 or STEAP1 approved for the treatment of cancer. However, we are aware of other companies that have masked T cell engager programs in development for PSMA, including but not limited to Janux Therapeutics, Inc. and Vir Biotechnology, Inc., and at least one other company, Werewolf Therapeutics, Inc., that has a masked T cell engager program in development for STEAP1. To our knowledge, there are no companies currently developing a masked T cell engager program targeting both PSMA and STEAP1 or a masked T cell engager program for CLDN18.2. However, we are aware of several companies developing non-masked T cell engager programs for CLDN18.2, including but not limited to Amgen Inc., Astellas Pharma Inc., AstraZeneca PLC, GSK plc, Lunan Pharmacuetical Group Co. Ltd. and Qilu Pharmaceutical Co., for PSMA, including but not limited to Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Xencor, Inc. (licensed to Johnson & Johnson), and for STEAP1, including but not limited to Xencor Inc. (licensed to Amgen Inc.) and Shanghai Henlius Biotech, Inc.

Current wording

With respect to our masked T cell engager programs, currently there are no T cell engager therapies targeting PSMA, CLDN18.2 or STEAP1 approved for the treatment of cancer. However, we are aware of other companies that have masked T cell engager programs in development for PSMA, including but not limited to Janux Therapeutics, Inc. and Vir Biotechnology, Inc., and at least one other company, Werewolf Therapeutics, Inc., that has a masked T cell engager program in development for STEAP1. To our knowledge, there are no companies currently developing a masked T cell engager program targeting both PSMA and STEAP1 or a masked T cell engager program for CLDN18.2. However, we are aware of several companies developing non-masked T cell engager programs for CLDN18.2, including but not limited to AstraZeneca PLC, Lunan Pharmaceutical Group Co. Ltd., Qilu Pharmaceutical Co. and Xencor, Inc. (licensed to Astellas Pharma Inc.), for PSMA, including but not limited to GSK plc, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Xencor, Inc. (licensed to Johnson & Johnson), and for STEAP1, including but not limited to Xencor, Inc. (licensed to Amgen Inc.) and Shanghai Henlius Biotech, Inc.

Previous wording

With respect to efarindodekin alfa, currently there are no IL-12 therapies approved for the treatment of cancer. However, we are aware of several companies that have IL-12 delivery programs in development, including but not limited to PDS Biotechnology Corporation, Philogen S.p.A., Shanghai KangaBio Co., Ltd. and Werewolf Therapeutics, Inc.

Current wording

With respect to efarindodekin alfa, currently there are no IL-12 therapies approved for the treatment of cancer. However, we are aware of several companies that have systemically delivered IL-12 programs in development, including but not limited to PDS Biotechnology Corporation, Philogen S.p.A., Shanghai KangaBio Co., Ltd. and Werewolf Therapeutics, Inc.

Previous wording

As is the case with other biotechnology companies, our success is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the biopharmaceutical industry involve both technological and legal complexity, and is therefore costly, time-consuming and inherently uncertain. In addition, the U.S. continues to adapt to wide-ranging patent reform legislation that became effective starting in 2012. Moreover, recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings have narrowed the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances and weakened the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty regarding 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 new legislation and decisions by 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 that we might obtain in the future. For example, the U.S. Supreme Court, in the case Amgen v. Sanofi, held that broad functional antibody claims are invalid for lack of enablement. In addition, in Juno v. Kite, the Federal Circuit held claims reciting broad antibody genus based on function invalid for lack of written description. Recently, the Federal Circuit issued precedential decisions in In re Cellect and Allergan v. MSN that could shorten or eliminate an extended patent term awarded under patent term adjustment in certain patent family members if challenged on the basis of obviousness-type double patenting. While we do not believe that any of the patents owned or licensed by us will be found invalid based on these decisions, we cannot predict how future decisions by the courts, Congress or the USPTO may impact the value of our patents. Similarly, changes in the patent laws of other jurisdictions could adversely affect our ability to obtain and effectively enforce our patent rights, which would have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

Current wording

As is the case with other biotechnology companies, our success is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the biopharmaceutical industry involve both technological and legal complexity, and is therefore costly, time-consuming and inherently uncertain. In addition, the U.S. continues to adapt to wide-ranging patent reform legislation that became effective starting in 2012. Moreover, recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings have narrowed the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances and weakened the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty regarding 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 new legislation and decisions by 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 that we might obtain in the future. For example, the U.S. Supreme Court, in the case Amgen v. Sanofi, held that broad functional antibody claims are invalid for lack of enablement. In addition, in Juno v. Kite, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held claims reciting broad antibody genus based on function invalid for lack of written description. In 2023 and 2024, respectively, the Federal Circuit issued precedential decisions in In re Cellect and Allergan v. MSN that could shorten or eliminate an extended patent term awarded under patent term adjustment in certain patent family members if challenged on the basis of obviousness-type double patenting. Recently, the Federal Circuit in Teva Pharmaceuticals v. Eli Lilly held that method-of-treatment claims reciting a genus of antibodies for a new therapeutic use satisfied the written description and enablement requirements if the claimed antibody genus was well-known in the art. Additionally, the U.S. Supreme Court in Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Amarin Pharma, Inc. held that induced infringement of pharmaceutical method-of-use patents generally requires affirmative acts encouraging infringement, and that the mere marketing of a product with a “skinny label” is insufficient. While we do not believe that any of the patents owned or licensed by us will be found invalid based on these decisions, we cannot predict how future decisions by the courts, Congress or the USPTO may impact the value of our patents. Similarly, changes in the patent laws of other jurisdictions could adversely affect our ability to obtain and effectively enforce our patent rights, which would have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

Previous wording

If disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our licensing arrangements on acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates. We are generally also subject to all of the same risks described in this Annual Report on Form 10-K with respect to protection of intellectual property that we license as we are for intellectual property that we own. If we or our licensors fail to adequately obtain or protect this intellectual property, our ability to commercialize products could suffer.

Current wording

If disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our licensing arrangements on acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates. We are generally also subject to all of the same risks described in this “Risk Factors” section with respect to protection of intellectual property that we license as we are for intellectual property that we own. If we or our licensors fail to adequately obtain or protect this intellectual property, our ability to commercialize products could suffer.

Previous wording

from a “first to invent” to a “first-to-file” system. Under a “first-to-file” system, assuming the other requirements for patentability are met, the first inventor to file a patent application generally will be entitled to a patent on the invention regardless of whether another inventor had made the invention earlier. The AIA includes a number of other significant changes to U.S. patent law, including provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted, redefine prior art and establish a USPTO-administered post-grant review system that has affected patent litigation. The AIA and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

Current wording

Recent or future patent reform legislation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents. For example, the AIA implemented in March 2013, moved the U.S. from a “first to invent” to a “first-to-file” system. Under a “first-to-file” system, assuming the other requirements for patentability are met, the first inventor to file a patent application generally will be entitled to a patent on the invention regardless of whether another inventor had made the invention earlier. The AIA includes a number of other significant changes to U.S. patent law, including provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted, redefine prior art and establish a USPTO-administered post-grant review system that has affected patent litigation. The AIA and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

Previous wording

Further, the FDA may determine that we must provide additional evidence and data before approving a BLA for our product candidates. For example, the FDA reviews an application to determine whether there is “substantial evidence” to support a finding of effectiveness for the proposed product for its intended use(s). The FDA has interpreted this evidentiary standard to generally require at least two adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to establish effectiveness of a new product. Under certain circumstances, however, the FDA has indicated that a single trial with certain characteristics and additional confirmatory evidence may satisfy this standard. The FDA issued draft guidance in September 2023 that outlines considerations for relying on confirmatory evidence in lieu of a second clinical trial to demonstrate effectiveness. In the event that we submit a BLA on the basis of one clinical trial and confirmatory evidence, the FDA could determine that such information is not sufficient to support approval of the application and the agency could require us to conduct an additional trial in support of the BLA.

Current wording

Further, the FDA may determine that we must provide additional evidence and data before approving a BLA for our product candidates. For example, the FDA reviews an application to determine whether there is “substantial evidence” to support a finding of effectiveness for the proposed product for its intended use(s). In most cases, the default requirement for FDA approval of a new product is one adequate and well-controlled pivotal clinical trial plus confirmatory evidence. However, in the event that we submit a BLA on the basis of one clinical trial and confirmatory evidence, the FDA could determine that such information is not sufficient to support approval of the application, and the FDA could require us to conduct an additional trial in support of the BLA.

Previous wording

For example, in December 2022, with the passage of Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act, or FDORA, Congress required sponsors to develop and submit a diversity action plan for each Phase 3 clinical trial or any other “pivotal study” of a new drug or biological product. These plans are meant to encourage the enrollment of more diverse patient populations in late-stage clinical trials of FDA-regulated products. In June 2024, the FDA issued draft guidance outlining the general requirements for diversity action plans, or DAPs. Unlike most guidance documents issued by the FDA, the DAP guidance, when finalized, will have the force of law, because FDORA specifically dictates that the form and manner for submission of DAPs are specified in FDA guidance. On January 27, 2025, in response to an executive order regarding diversity, equity and inclusion programs, the FDA removed this draft guidance from its website. That action, along with similar actions by the current administration to remove many other healthcare webpages, is the subject of ongoing litigation. In late July 2025, pursuant to a court order, the FDA restored the draft DAP guidance to its website with a statement that

Current wording

For example, in December 2022, with the passage of Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act, or FDORA, Congress required sponsors to develop and submit a diversity action plan for each Phase 3 clinical trial or any other “pivotal study” of a new drug or biological product. These plans are meant to encourage the enrollment of more diverse patient populations in late-stage clinical trials of FDA-regulated products. In June 2024, the FDA issued draft guidance outlining the general requirements for diversity action plans, or DAPs. Unlike most guidance documents issued by the FDA, the DAP guidance, when finalized, will have the force of law, because FDORA specifically dictates that the form and manner for submission of DAPs are specified in FDA guidance. On January 27, 2025, in response to an executive order regarding diversity, equity and inclusion programs, the FDA removed this draft guidance from its website. That action, along with similar actions by the current administration to remove many other healthcare webpages, is the subject of ongoing litigation. In late July 2025, pursuant to a court order, the FDA restored the draft DAP guidance to its website with a statement that “information on this page may be modified and/or removed in the future subject to the terms of the court’s order and implemented consistent with applicable law.” Accordingly, in light of these ongoing actions, there is considerable uncertainty surrounding the draft DAP guidance and how the FDA will consider DAPs in connection with its review of BLAs.

Previous wording

The FDA and comparable regulatory agencies in foreign jurisdictions, such as the EMA and Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use, play an important role in the development of our product candidates by providing guidance on our clinical development programs and reviewing our regulatory submissions, including INDs, requests for special designations and marketing applications. If these oversight and review activities are disrupted, then correspondingly our ability to develop and secure timely approval of our product candidates could be impacted in a negative manner. For example, on July 14, 2025, following litigation reaching the U.S. Supreme Court, the current administration began to carry out layoffs across HHS, including at the FDA. The loss of FDA leadership and personnel could lead to disruptions and delays in FDA guidance, review, and approval of our product candidates.

Current wording

The FDA and comparable regulatory agencies in foreign jurisdictions, such as the EMA and Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use, play an important role in the development of our product candidates by providing guidance on our clinical development programs and reviewing our regulatory submissions, including INDs, requests for special designations and marketing applications. If these oversight and review activities are disrupted, then correspondingly our ability to develop and secure timely approval of our product candidates could be impacted in a negative manner. For example, on July 14, 2025, following litigation reaching the U.S. Supreme Court, the current administration began to carry out layoffs across HHS, including at the FDA. The loss of FDA leadership and personnel could lead to disruptions and delays in FDA guidance, review, and approval of our product candidates. In November 2025, Congress agreed to provide full-year funding for the FDA through September 30, 2026, at a slight decrease compared to previous spending levels. There were several reports in 2025 of the FDA failing to meet its Prescription Drug User Fee Act, or PDUFA, goal dates for approval of a new drug application, or NDA, or BLA due to heavy workload and limited resources.

Previous wording

The FDA and Congress may further reevaluate the Orphan Drug Act and its regulations and policies. This may be particularly true in light of a decision from the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in September 2021. In Catalyst Pharms, Inc. v. Becerra, or Catalyst, that court held that, for the purpose of determining the scope of orphan drug exclusivity, the term “same disease or condition” in the statute means the designated “rare disease or condition” and could not be interpreted by the FDA to mean the “indication or use.” Thus, the court concluded, orphan drug exclusivity applies to the entire designated disease or condition rather than the approved “indication or use.” Although there have been legislative proposals to overrule this decision, they have not been enacted into law. On January 23, 2023, the FDA announced that, in matters beyond the scope of the Catalyst court order, the FDA will continue to apply its existing regulations tying orphan-drug exclusivity to the uses or indications for which the orphan drug is approved. More recently, however, on February 14, 2025, a federal district court in Washington, D.C., fully embraced the reasoning of the Catalyst decision in another decision challenging the scope of orphan drug exclusivity. On April 17, 2025, the FDA appealed this decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The implications of this decision, and its impact on the FDA’s implementation of the Orphan Drug Act, are unclear at this point.

Current wording

The FDA and Congress may further reevaluate the Orphan Drug Act and its regulations and policies. For example, in September 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit held that, for the purpose of determining the scope of orphan drug exclusivity, the term “same disease or condition” in the statute means the designated “rare disease or condition” and could not be interpreted by the FDA to mean the “indication or use.” Thus, the court concluded, orphan drug exclusivity applies to the entire designated disease or condition rather than the approved “indication or use.” Subsequently, in another case, a federal district court in Washington, D.C., followed the reasoning of the 11 th Circuit decision and that decision was appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. On February 3, 2026, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2026 was enacted into law. It overruled these court decisions and codified the FDA’s longstanding interpretation of the scope of orphan drug exclusivity to apply to “the same drug for the same approved use or indication within such designated rare disease or condition.” This change, which applies retroactively, expressly authorizes the FDA to approve multiple versions of the same orphan drug for different sub-indications and subpopulations, such as adult and pediatric patients or multiple variations of the same disease that are caused by different genetic variants.

Previous wording

On June 6, 2023, Merck & Co., or Merck, filed a lawsuit against the HHS and CMS asserting that, among other things, the IRA’s Drug Price Negotiation Program for Medicare constitutes an uncompensated taking in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. Subsequently, a number of other parties, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Bristol Myers Squibb Company, the PhRMA, Astellas, Novo Nordisk, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, AstraZeneca and Boehringer Ingelheim, also filed lawsuits in various courts with similar constitutional claims against the HHS and CMS. The HHS has generally won the substantive disputes in these cases, or succeeded in getting claims dismissed for lack of standing. We expect that current or future litigation involving provisions of the IRA will have unpredictable and uncertain results on the implementation and impact of the IRA on the biotechnology industry generally, as well as our business and current or future products.

Current wording

On June 6, 2023, Merck & Co., or Merck, filed a lawsuit against the HHS and CMS asserting that, among other things, the IRA’s Drug Price Negotiation Program for Medicare constitutes an uncompensated taking in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. Subsequently, a number of other parties, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Bristol Myers Squibb Company, the PhRMA, Astellas, Novo Nordisk, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, AstraZeneca and Boehringer Ingelheim, also filed lawsuits in various courts with similar constitutional claims against the HHS and CMS. Every court that has thus far considered substantive challenges to the Medicare drug price negotiation program has ruled against the pharmaceutical industry, dismissing both constitutional and statutory arguments. We expect that current or future litigation involving provisions of the IRA will have unpredictable and uncertain results on the implementation and impact of the IRA on the biotechnology industry generally, as well as our business and current or future products.

Previous wording

In 2025, the U.S. government initiated a series of tariff-related actions against U.S. trading partners, which included a number of reciprocal and country-specific tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or the IEEPA. In February 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs, invalidating both the “reciprocal” tariffs and certain country-specific tariffs. The President subsequently invoked Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 to impose a 10% tariff, which could be raised to 15%, on nearly all foreign imports. The tariffs imposed under Section 122 are temporary and valid for 150 days without congressional approval. Multiple states have challenged these tariffs in court.The U.S. Trade Representative concurrently initiated two investigations under Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which may also result in additional tariffs.

Current wording

In 2025, the U.S. government initiated a series of tariff-related actions against U.S. trading partners, which included a number of reciprocal and country-specific tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or the IEEPA. In February 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs, invalidating both the “reciprocal” tariffs and certain country-specific tariffs. The President subsequently invoked Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, or the Trade Act, to impose a 10% tariff, which could be raised to 15%, on nearly all foreign imports. The tariffs imposed under Section 122 are temporary and valid for 150 days without congressional approval. On May 7, 2026, the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled that these tariffs were unlawful and issued a permanent injunction for certain named private party plaintiffs and the State of Washington. The U.S. government appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and, on June 11, 2026, the Federal Circuit stayed enforcement of the lower court’s permanent injunction pending further appeals.

Previous wording

Separately, in 2025, the Department of Commerce initiated an investigation under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 into the impact on U.S. national security of the imports of pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients, including finished drug products, medical countermeasures, critical inputs such as active pharmaceutical ingredients, and key starting materials, and derivative products of those items. On September 25, 2025, the U.S. administration announced that, beginning October 1, 2025, all branded or patented drugs imported in the U.S. would face a 100% tariff. At the same time, the administration indicated that these tariffs could be avoided by building pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities in the U.S. Thereafter, the administration delayed the October 1, 2025 effective date of the tariffs on branded or patented pharmaceutical products announcing that the administration had now “begun preparing” tariffs on manufacturers that do not build in the U.S. or enter into a most-favored-nation drug pricing agreement with the administration. Significant uncertainty surrounding trade policy and tariff activity continues.

Current wording

Separately, in 2025, the Department of Commerce initiated an investigation under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 into the impact on U.S. national security of the imports of pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients, including finished drug products, medical countermeasures, critical inputs such as active pharmaceutical ingredients, and key starting materials, and derivative products of those items.

Previous wording

On April 2, 2026, the administration issued a proclamation invoking Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 to impose tariffs on imports of patented pharmaceuticals, biologics, and associated ingredients into the U.S. Specifically, beginning July 31, 2026, a 100% tariff will apply to pharmaceutical articles classified in certain 10-digit harmonized tariff, or HTS, codes that are subject to a valid, unexpired U.S. patent and are listed in the FDA’s Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations, or the Orange Book, or are listed in the FDA’s Lists of Licensed Biological Products, or the Purple Book, unless a relevant exemption applies. The 100% tariff also applies to active pharmaceutical ingredients, or APIs, and key starting materials for such articles. For companies like ours that are not listed in the annexes to the proclamation (i.e., those that have not concluded qualifying onshoring plans and MFN pharmaceutical pricing agreements with the U.S. government), the Section 232 tariffs will be effective on September 29, 2026. Preferential tariff rates are provided for imports of covered pharmaceuticals from Japan, the EU, Korea, Switzerland, Lichtenstein and the U.K. Certain categories of products are exempt from these tariffs, including, but not limited to, generic pharmaceuticals and biosimilars; specified U.S.-origin pharmaceutical products; and products classified in certain HTS codes, listed in Annex IV of the proclamation. Drugs and associated ingredients for all approved indications that are designated as orphan pursuant to the Orphan Drug Act; drugs for certain specific uses, including nuclear medicines; plasma-derived therapies; fertility treatments; cell and gene therapies; antibody drug conjugates; medical countermeasures related to chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear threats; animal health; and other specialty pharmaceutical products to be later identified by the Secretary of Commerce are also likely to be exempt from the tariffs.

Current wording

100% tariff will apply to pharmaceutical articles classified in certain 10-digit harmonized tariff, or HTS, codes that are subject to a valid, unexpired U.S. patent and are listed in the FDA’s Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations, or the Orange Book, or are listed in the FDA’s Lists of Licensed Biological Products, or the Purple Book, unless a relevant exemption applies. The 100% tariff also applies to active pharmaceutical ingredients, or APIs, and key starting materials for such articles. For companies like ours that are not listed in the annexes to the proclamation (i.e., those that have not concluded qualifying onshoring plans and MFN pharmaceutical pricing agreements with the U.S. government), the Section 232 tariffs will be effective on September 29, 2026. Preferential tariff rates are provided for imports of covered pharmaceuticals from Japan, the EU, Korea, Switzerland, Lichtenstein and the U.K. Certain categories of products are exempt from these tariffs, including, but not limited to, generic pharmaceuticals and biosimilars; specified U.S.-origin pharmaceutical products; and products classified in certain HTS codes, listed in Annex IV of the proclamation. Other products likely to be exempt from the tariffs include drugs and associated ingredients for all approved indications that are designated as orphan pursuant to the Orphan Drug Act; drugs for certain specific uses, including nuclear medicines; plasma-derived therapies; fertility treatments; cell and gene therapies; antibody drug conjugates; medical countermeasures related to chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear threats; animal health; and other specialty pharmaceutical products to be later identified by the Secretary of Commerce.

Previous wording

We depend on our information technology systems and those of our third-party service providers, and any failure of these systems could harm our business. Security breaches, loss of data, inability to access systems, and other disruptions could compromise sensitive information related to our business or prevent us from accessing critical information and expose us to liability or competitive or reputational harm, which could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Current wording

We depend on our information technology systems and those of our third-party service providers, and any failure of these systems could harm our business. Security breaches, loss of data, inability to access systems, and other disruptions could compromise sensitive information related to our business or prevent us from accessing critical information and expose us to liability or competitive or reputational harm, which could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition. In addition, artificial intelligence, or AI, presents emerging risks and challenges that may impact our business.

Previous wording

The risk of a security breach or disruption or data loss, particularly through cyber-attacks or cyber intrusion, including by computer hackers, supply chain attacks, foreign governments and cyber terrorists, has generally increased as the number, intensity and sophistication of attempted attacks and intrusions from around the world have increased. Additionally, attackers may use artificial intelligence and machine learning to launch more automated, targeted and coordinated attacks against targets. In addition, the prevalent use of mobile devices that access confidential information increases the risk of lost or stolen devices, security incidents and data security breaches, which could lead to the loss of confidential information or other intellectual property. We also may face increased risks of a security breach or disruption due to our reliance on internet technology and the number of our employees who are working remotely, which may create additional opportunities for cybercriminals to exploit vulnerabilities. The costs to us to mitigate network security problems, bugs, viruses, worms, malicious software programs and security vulnerabilities could be significant, and while we have implemented security measures to protect our data security and information technology systems, our efforts to address these problems may not be successful, and these problems could result in unexpected interruptions, delays, cessation of service, negative publicity and other harm to our business and our competitive position. If such an event were to occur and cause interruptions in our operations, it could result in a material disruption of our product development programs.

Current wording

The risk of a security breach or disruption or data loss, particularly through cyber-attacks or cyber intrusion, including by computer hackers, supply chain attacks, foreign governments and cyber terrorists, has generally increased as the number, intensity and sophistication of attempted attacks and intrusions from around the world have increased. Additionally, attackers may use AI and machine learning to launch more automated, targeted and coordinated attacks against targets. In addition, the prevalent use of mobile devices that access confidential information increases the risk of lost or stolen devices, security incidents and data security breaches, which could lead to the loss of confidential information or other intellectual property. We also may face increased risks of a security breach or disruption due to our reliance on internet technology and the number of our employees who are working remotely, which may create additional opportunities for cybercriminals to exploit vulnerabilities. The costs to us to mitigate network security problems, bugs, viruses, worms, malicious software programs and security vulnerabilities could be significant, and while we have implemented security measures to protect our data security and information technology systems, our efforts to address these problems may not be successful, and these problems could result in unexpected interruptions, delays, cessation of service, negative publicity and other harm to our business and our competitive position. If such an event were to occur and cause interruptions in our operations, it could result in a material disruption of our product development programs.

Previous wording

our recently effected reverse stock split of our common stock, which became effective March 13, 2026;

Current wording

the reverse stock split of our common stock, which became effective March 13, 2026;

Previous wording

The one percent excise tax generally applies to any acquisition of stock by the publicly traded company (or certain of its affiliates) from a stockholder of the company in exchange for money or other property (other than stock of the company itself), subject to certain exceptions. Thus, the excise tax could apply to certain transactions that are not traditional stock repurchases. The OBBBA contains numerous tax provisions that may significantly affect our business or financial condition. The recent changes under the OBBBA include tax rate extensions, changes to the business interest deduction limitation, the election to either fully deduct or continue to capitalize and amortize domestic research and development expenditures (in contrast to the continued capitalization and amortization of foreign research and development expenditures), changes to the bonus depreciation deduction rules, and changes to the international tax framework. Regulatory guidance under the OBBBA and other tax-related legislation is and continues to be forthcoming, and we will utilize such guidance to analyze the impact of such legislation on our business and financial condition. In addition, it is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to federal tax legislation.

Current wording

Income, sales, use or other tax laws, statutes, rules, or regulations could be enacted or amended at any time, which could affect our business or financial condition, including causing potentially adverse impacts to our effective tax rate, tax liabilities, and cash tax obligations. For example, the IRA was signed into law in August 2022 and OBBBA was signed into law in July 2025. The IRA introduced new tax provisions, including a one percent excise tax imposed on certain stock repurchases by publicly traded companies. The one percent excise tax generally applies to any acquisition of stock by the publicly traded company (or certain of its affiliates) from a stockholder of the company in exchange for money or other property (other than stock of the company itself), subject to certain exceptions. Thus, the excise tax could apply to certain transactions that are not traditional stock repurchases. The OBBBA contains numerous tax provisions that may significantly affect our business or financial condition. The recent changes under the OBBBA include tax rate extensions, changes to the business interest deduction limitation, the election to either fully deduct or continue to capitalize and amortize domestic research and development expenditures (in contrast to the continued capitalization and amortization of foreign research and development expenditures), changes to the bonus depreciation deduction rules, and changes to the international tax framework. Regulatory guidance under the OBBBA and other tax-related legislation is and continues to be forthcoming, and we will utilize such guidance to analyze the impact of such legislation on our business and financial condition. In addition, it is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to federal tax legislation.