CASSAVA SCIENCES INC

Overview

Cassava Sciences, Inc. is a clinical-stage biotechnology company based in Austin, Texas. Our mission is to detect and treat neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer’s disease. Our novel science is based on stabilizing – but not removing – a critical protein in the Alzheimer’s brain. Our lead therapeutic drug candidate, simufilam, is under clinical evaluation for the proposed treatment of Alzheimer’s disease dementia in Phase 3 clinical studies.

For over 12 years, we have combined state-of-the-art technology with new insights in neurobiology to develop novel solutions for Alzheimer’s disease and other neurodegenerative diseases. Our strategy is to leverage our unique scientific/clinical platform to develop a first-in-class program for treating neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer’s—a degenerative disease of the brain, where a patient’s cognition and health functions decline over time as the disease progresses and the patient moves from mild to moderate to, eventually, severe Alzheimer’s disease.

We currently have two biopharmaceutical assets under development:

Our scientific approach for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease seeks to simultaneously suppressboth neurodegeneration and neuroinflammation. We believe our ability to potentially improve multiple vital functions in the brain represents a new, different and crucial approach to address Alzheimer’s disease.

Our lead product candidate, simufilam, is a proprietary small molecule drug. Simufilam was discovered and designed in-house and was characterized by our academic collaborators during research activities that were conducted from approximately 2008 to date.

Simufilam targets an altered form of a protein called filamin A (FLNA) in the Alzheimer’s brain. Published studies have demonstrated that the altered form of FLNA causes neuronal dysfunction, neuronal degeneration and neuroinflammation. Specifically, we believe simufilam disrupts amyloid binding to the α7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (α7nAChR), which underlies our drug’s primary mechanism of action in Alzheimer’s disease. More recent data also suggest a meaningful impact of simufilam on mTOR signaling. Because mTOR contributes to age-related cellular changes, simufilam’s suppression of mTOR overactivation, concurrent with improved insulin sensitivity, may slow certain aging processes and attenuate this pathological feature, potentially benefiting brain function and memory in Alzheimer’s disease and in aging.

We own exclusive, worldwide rights to our drug and diagnostic assets and related technologies, without royalty obligations to any third party. Our patent protection with respect to simufilam and use of simufilam for Alzheimer’s disease and other neurodegenerative diseases currently runs through 2039 and includes nine issued U.S. patents. Corresponding foreign filings have been made for each of the U.S. filings.

We are currently conducting two randomized placebo-controlled Phase 3 clinical trials of oral simufilam in patients with Alzheimer’s disease dementia. Both trials are fully enrolled. The trials have randomized a total of approximately 1,900 patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer’s disease at baseline. All efficacy data from our Phase 3 program remain blinded. There are no interim analyses on efficacy outcomes.

Our first Phase 3 study, called RETHINK-ALZ, is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of simufilam 100 mg tablets versus placebo over 52 weeks (NCT04994483). Top-line results of our 52-week Phase 3 study are anticipated approximately year-end 2024.

Our second Phase 3 study, called REFOCUS-ALZ, is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of oral simufilam 100 mg and 50 mg tablets versus placebo over 76 weeks (NCT05026177). Top-line results of our 76-week Phase 3 study are anticipated approximately mid-year 2025.

Risk is Fundamental to the Drug Development Process

We are in the business of new drug discovery and development. Our research and development activities are long, complex, costly and involve a high degree of risk. Holders of our common stock should carefully read this Annual Report in its entirety, including “Item 1A. Risk Factors”.Because risk is fundamental to the process of drug discovery and development, you are cautioned to not invest in our publicly traded securities unless you are prepared to sustain a total loss of the money you have invested.

About Alzheimer’s Disease

Alzheimer’s is a degenerative disease of the brain that affects cognition, function and behavior. Over time, a patient’s cognition and health functions decline as the disease takes its toll. With disease progression, patients move from mild to moderate to, eventually, severe Alzheimer’s disease. Cognitive decline becomes more pronounced, and presumably more difficult to treat, in advanced stages of the disease.

An estimated 6.7 million Americans age 65 and older were living with Alzheimer's dementia in 2023, according to the Alzheimer’s Association. According to the same source, in 2011, the largest ever demographic generation of the American population — the baby-boom generation — started reaching age 65. By 2030, the segment of the U.S. population age 65 and older will have grown substantially, and the projected 74 million older Americans will make up over 20% of the total population. Because age is a well-known risk factor for Alzheimer’s dementia, new cases of Alzheimer’s dementia are expected to climb with the growth in the number of elderly Americans.

Our Scientific Approach is Different

Given the biopharmaceutical industry’s challenging track record in Alzheimer’s research and drug development, we believe there is an urgent need to consider innovative approaches to combat this disease.

For more than twelve years, we have developed a new and promising scientific approach for the treatment and diagnosis of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer’s disease. Importantly, we do not seek to clear amyloid out of the brain. Rather, our novel science is based on stabilizing – but not removing – a critical protein in the brain.

Our scientific approach is to treat neurodegeneration by targeting an altered form of a scaffold protein called FLNA. Through years of basic research, we and our academic collaborators identified FLNA as a structurally altered protein that enables neurodegeneration and neuroinflammation pathways in the Alzheimer’s brain. We have shown that the altered form of FLNA is pervasive in the Alzheimer’s brain and essentially undetectable in healthy control brains.

Using scientific insight and lab techniques, we believe we have elucidated this protein dysfunction. Through this work, we have produced experimental evidence that altered FLNA plays a critical role in Alzheimer’s disease. We engineered a family of high-affinity, small molecules to target this structurally altered protein and restore its normal shape and function. This family of small molecules, including our lead therapeutic product candidate, simufilam, was designed in-house and characterized by our academic collaborators.

Our lead drug candidate, simufilam, is a small molecule (oral) drug with a novel mechanism of action. The target of simufilam is altered FLNA, the structurally altered protein in the brain that we seek to stabilize. Importantly, since simufilam has a unique mechanism of action, we believe its potential therapeutic effects may be additive or synergistic with existing drug treatments for Alzheimer’s disease dementia.

Our science is based on stabilizing a critical protein in the brain

Proteins are essential for cell function because they participate in virtually every biological process. If protein function is impaired, the health consequences can be devastating. Technological advances in medicine and improvements in lifestyle are making our lives longer. But with age, genetic mutations and other factors conspire against healthy cells, resulting in altered proteins. Sometimes a cell can rid itself of altered proteins. However, when disease changes the shape and function of critical proteins, multiple downstream processes are impaired. There are many clinical conditions in which proteins become structurally altered and impair the normal function of cells, tissues and organs, leading to disease. Conversely, restoring altered proteins back to health –called proteostasis – is a well-accepted therapeutic strategy in clinical medicine.

For over 100 years, scientists have ascribed various neurodegenerative diseases to proteins that misfold and are rendered pathological. In Alzheimer’s disease, certain proteins, such as amyloid and tau, lose their normal shape and function. Such misfolded proteins can break down or aggregate in clumps and form plaque or tangles in the brain. Destruction of neuronal synapses, accelerated death of neurons, and dysfunction of the brain support cells, are all widely believed to be direct consequences of misfolded proteins.

FLNA is a scaffolding protein found in high levels in the brain. A healthy scaffolding protein brings multiple proteins together, coordinating their interaction. However, an altered form of FLNA protein is found in the Alzheimer’s brain. Our experimental evidence shows that altered FLNA protein contributes to Alzheimer’s disease by disrupting the normal function of neurons, leading to neurodegeneration and brain inflammation. Our product candidate, simufilam, aims to counter the altered and toxic form of FLNA in the brain, thus restoring the normal function of this critical protein.

One drug, multiple effects

Simufilam binds to altered FLNA with very high (femtomolar) affinity. We believe simufilam improves brain health by reverting altered FLNA back to its native, healthy conformation, thus countering downstream toxic effects of altered FLNA. This drug effect restores the normal function of key brain receptors, including: the alpha-7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor; the N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor; and the insulin receptor. These receptors have pivotal roles in brain cell survival, cognition and memory. In addition, recent data suggest a beneficial impact of simufilam on mTOR signaling.

We have generated and published experimental evidence of improved brain health by restoring altered FLNA with simufilam. In animal models, treatment with simufilam resulted in dramatic improvements in brain health, such as reduced amyloid and tau deposits, improved receptor signaling and improved learning and memory. In addition, simufilam has another beneficial treatment effect of significantly reducing inflammatory cytokines in the brain. In animal models of disease, treatment with simufilam greatly reduced levels of IL-6 and suppressed TNF-alpha and IL-1beta levels by 86% and 80%, respectively, illustrating a powerful anti-neuroinflammatory effect.

By restoring function to multiple receptors and exerting powerful anti-inflammatory effects, we believe our approach has potential to slow the progression of Alzheimer’s disease in patients. We also believe our scientific approach may broaden the range of possible treatment approaches for this complex disease.

Our science is published in multiple peer-reviewed journals. In addition, our research has been supported by NIH under multiple research grant awards. Each grant was awarded following an in-depth, peer-reviewed evaluation of our approach for scientific and technical merit by a panel of outside experts in the field.

Publication Confirming Mechanism of Action of Simufilam

In September 2023, we announced the publication of new research that confirms the biological activity of simufilam. Researchers at the Cochin Institute (Paris, France) used a highly precise cell-based assay based on TR-FRET to show that simufilam interrupts amyloid binding to the α7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (α7nAChR). We believe disruption of amyloid binding to α7nAChR underlies simufilam’s primary mechanism of action in Alzheimer’s disease. The research paper was co-authored by Hoau-Yan Wang and Zhe Pei of the City University of New York, Erika Cecon, Julie Dam and Ralf Jockers of the Institut Cochin, and Lindsay Burns of Cassava Sciences, and appeared in a special* issue ofInternational Journal of Molecular Sciences,*a peer-reviewed journal. See Figure 1.

Figure 1. Experiment conducted by Erika Cecon, Université Paris Cité, Institut Cochin in an assay she developed: Cecon et al 2019;Br J Pharmacol; 176:3475-3488. Data shown are means of pooled data from 4 separate experiments ±SEM.

Publication Showing Simufilam Suppresses Overactive mTOR

In June 2023, we announced the publication of new research that showed the effects of simufilam on the mechanistic Target of Rapamycin (mTOR). Scientific literature shows overactive mTOR plays a key role in aging, Alzheimer’s disease and other conditions. When functioning normally, mTOR monitors cellular needs and is activated by insulin. The new published research shows mTOR is overactive in lymphocytes isolated from blood collected from Alzheimer's patients versus healthy controls. After oral administration of simufilam 100 mg twice daily to Alzheimer's patients for 28 days, lymphocytes showed normalized mTOR activity and restored sensitivity to insulin.

These data suggest a meaningful impact of simufilam on mTOR signaling. The suppression of overactive mTOR signaling and its improved responsiveness to insulin represents a mechanistic benefit of simufilam beyond the disruption of pathogenic signaling pathways of soluble amyloid. These improvements in mTOR signaling may also result from reversing an altered conformation of FLNA, allowing FLNA to dissociate from the insulin receptor when insulin binds and initiates signaling. Because mTOR contributes to age-related cellular changes, simufilam’s suppression of mTOR overactivation, concurrent with improved insulin sensitivity, may slow certain aging processes and attenuate this pathological feature of Alzheimer’s disease, potentially benefiting brain function and memory in Alzheimer’s disease and in aging. This mTOR research paper was co-authored by Hoau-Yan Wang, Zhe Pei and Kuo-Chieh Lee of the City University of New York, Boris Nikolov, Tamara Doehner and John Puente, who are investigators in the clinical trial protocols, and Lindsay Burns of Cassava Sciences, and appeared inFrontiers in Aging, a peer-reviewed journal.

Simufilam Drug Development

IND submission to FDA, Drug Safety in Early Clinical Studies

For over a decade, we conducted basic research, in vitro studies and preclinical studies in support of a successful Investigational New Drug (IND) submission to FDA for simufilam, including requisite studies around safety pharmacology, toxicology, genotoxicity and bioanalytical methods. In 2017 we filed an IND with FDA for simufilam.

Following FDA acceptance of our IND in 2017, we investigated the safety, dosing and pharmacokinetic profile of simufilam in healthy human volunteers. The design of our first-in-human Phase 1 study was based on regulatory feedback, clinical and scientific rationale and observations from previously conducted preclinical and in vitro studies. In a Phase 1 study, simufilam was evaluated in 24 healthy human volunteers (18 simufilam, 6 placebo) in a single site in the U.S. for safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics. Study subjects were administered a single oral dose of 50, 100 or 200 mg of simufilam or placebo. Drug appeared safe and well-tolerated. Importantly, simufilam showed no treatment-related adverse effects and no dose-limiting safety findings. Pharmacokinetic measurements demonstrated that simufilam, a small molecule, was rapidly absorbed. Dose-proportionality was observed over the full dose range of 50 to 200 mg.

Phase 2 Clinical Studies

In 2019, we completed a first-in-patient, clinical-proof-of-concept, open-label Phase 2a study of simufilam in the U.S., with substantial support from the National Institute on Aging (NIA), a division of the NIH. In this small study of thirteen patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s disease, treatment with simufilam for 28 days significantly improved certain exploratory biomarkers of Alzheimer’s pathology, neurodegeneration and neuroinflammation (p<0.001). Drug was safe and well-tolerated. Biomarkers effects were seen in all patients in both cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and plasma.

In September 2020, we reported final results of a Phase 2b study with simufilam in Alzheimer’s disease. In this clinical study funded by the NIH, Alzheimer’s patients treated with 50 mg or 100 mg of simufilam twice-daily for 28 days showed statistically significant (p<0.05) improvements in CSF biomarkers of disease pathology, neurodegeneration and neuroinflammation, versus Alzheimer’s patients who took placebo. Simufilam treatment also significantly reduced levels of plasma P-tau181 in sample testing conducted by Quanterix Corporation, a third-party vendor. In addition, Alzheimer’s patients treated with simufilam showed improvements in validated tests of episodic memory and spatial working memory, versus patients on placebo. Cognitive improvements correlated most strongly with decreases in levels of P-tau181. Drug was safe and well-tolerated.

Given the absence of observable dose-limiting effects in our Phase 1 or Phase 2 studies, and in light of the strong scientific rationale and multiple peer-reviewed publications and research grant awards, we determined that simufilam demonstrated favorable proof-of-principle for further evaluation as an investigational drug for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease.

24-Month Clinical Safety ** Study**

Much of the strategic value of our 24 month clinical safety study is to support simufilam’s long-term safety profile in patients. We believe a well-designed, long-term, safety study is a prudent risk-management undertaking. Clinical results may serve to help inform and manage the inherent risks and uncertainties of drug development while we undertake a large, expensive Phase 3 clinical testing program.

In March 2020, we initiated a clinical safety study of simufilam, our lead drug candidate, in patients with Alzheimer’s disease (NCT04388254). This study was funded in part by a research grant award from NIH. This study was designed to evaluate the long-term clinical safety and tolerability of simufilam in patients with Alzheimer’s disease over 24 months. The study included a pre-specified exploratory efficacy endpoint of mean change in ADAS-Cog11 scores, a cognitive scale widely used in Alzheimer’s clinical research. This study enrolled over 200 patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s disease ((Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) 16-26) who were recruited from 16 U.S. clinical sites. Alzheimer’s is a progressive disease, with severity of disease typically assessed by MMSE score. In this study, mild patients are MMSE 21-26, and moderate patients are MMSE 16-20.

We conducted the 24-month safety study in three continuous phases:

Study participants received simufilam oral tablets 100 mg twice-daily in the open-label treatment phases, and simufilam or matching placebo during the randomized withdrawal phase. In an open-label study design, both the health providers and the patients are aware of the drug treatment being given.

All study participants who completed 12 months of open-label simufilam treatment were eligible to participate in the 6-month randomized, placebo-controlled withdrawal phase. Likewise, all study participants who completed the randomized, placebo-controlled withdrawal phase were eligible for 6 additional months of open-label treatment.

Study Results for the 12-month, Open-label Treatment Phase

In January 2023, we announced positive top-line results for the 12-month, open-label treatment phase of the safety study. The pre-specified, exploratory efficacy endpoint was change in baseline on ADAS-Cog11, a cognitive scale widely used in Alzheimer’s clinical research. Other exploratory endpoints included the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) to assess disease stage by cognitive impairment; the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) to assess dementia related behavior; and the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS). Endpoints were measured at baseline (study entry) and month 12.

Top-line Results–** mean scores, baseline to month 12**(lower is better, except for MMSE):

Response Analysis–* baseline to month 12***

The Full Analysis Set (FAS) population (N=216) was used for the statistical analysis of efficacy endpoints. Mild and moderate sub-groups showed notable differences on changes in ADAS-Cog mean scores, baseline to month 12 (lower is better):

We believe the improvement in ADAS-Cog over 1 year in mild patients taking simufilam is well outside the expected range of historic placebo decline rates from numerous other studies. Figure 2: historical declines on ADAS-Cog in early disease (MCI + mild) and mild disease.

Figure 1:* Statistical model of simufilam versus historical 1-year placebo declines on ADAS-Cog in early disease and mild disease. Forest plot by Pentara Corporation, independent biostatisticians**. Data was sourced from non-randomized studies (i.e., ADNI) and randomized, controlled trials conducted by other sponsors in patients with early (i.e., MCI + mild) and mild Alzheimer*’s disease.

Safety Data - Simufilam 100 mg tablets twice daily appeared safe and well tolerated in this treatment phase of the open-label study. There were no drug-related serious adverse events. Three treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 7% or more of study patients: COVID-19 (12%), urinary tract infection (10%) and headache (9%). Reported TEAEs are based on all study patients who received at least one dose of drug.

Biomarker Data - In this open-label treatment phase of the study, exploratory biomarkers were analyzed from CSF collected from 25 patients who agreed to undergo a lumbar puncture at baseline and again after 6 months of treatment. CSF samples were analyzed blind to timepoint by our academic collaborator at City University of New York.

P-values shown below are baseline vs. 6-month levels by paired t-test:

Study Results for the 6-month, Randomized Withdrawal Study Phase ("Cognition Maintenance Study")

In May 2021, we initiated the randomized, withdrawal phase of the 24 month safety study, which has been previously referred to as the ‘Cognition Maintenance Study' or CMS. The CMS has a randomized, withdrawal study design. The International Council for Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) explains that in a randomized withdrawal study,* *“subjects receiving a test treatment for a specified time are randomly assigned to continued treatment with the test treatment or to placebo (i.e., withdrawal of active therapy)…Any difference that emerges between the group receiving continued treatment and the group randomized to placebo would demonstrate the effect of the active treatment.”

The design of randomized, withdrawal phase of the study was intended to evaluate simufilam’s effects on cognition and health outcomes in Alzheimer’s patients who continue with drug treatment versus patients who discontinue drug treatment. This was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study of simufilam in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s disease. Study patients were randomized (1:1) to simufilam or placebo for six months. To enroll in the CMS, patients must have previously completed 12 months or more of open-label treatment with simufilam. Final enrollment was 157 patients. See Figure 3.

Figure 3. Design of the Randomized Withdrawal Phase (CMS)

Top-line Results - Simufilam treatment for 6 months slowed cognitive decline by 38% compared to placebo in mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s disease (MMSE 16-26) patients. The placebo arm declined 1.5 points on ADAS-Cog, and this arm declined at all measured timepoints. The simufilam arm declined 0.9 points on ADAS-Cog, a 38% difference in favor of drug at month 6 (95% CI, – 2.1 to 1.0; not significant for sample sizes). See Table 1 and Chart 1.

Table 1: Results of Randomized Withdrawal Study–** cognitive change, full analysis set (FAS)**

Upon randomization into the randomized, withdrawal phase, mean baseline MMSE scores were 18.6 and 18.1 for the simufilam and placebo arms, respectively. Mean baseline ADAS-Cog scores were 19.3 and 21.9 for the simufilam and placebo arms, respectively.

Simufilam Drug Effects Favored Patients with Mild Alzheimer*’s Disease–** ***Simufilam treatment for 6 months slowed cognitive decline > 200% compared to placebo in mild Alzheimer’s disease. Patients with mild Alzheimer’s (MMSE 21-26) on placebo declined 0.6 points on ADAS-Cog over 6 months as a group. Patients with mild Alzheimer’s on simufilam improved 0.6 points over 6 months as a group, a 205% difference in favor of drug (95% CI, – 2.6 to 0.4; not significant for sample sizes). See Table 2 and Chart 2.

Table 2: Results of Randomized Withdrawal Study–** cognitive change, mild patients**

Upon randomization into the randomized, withdrawal phase of the study, mean baseline MMSE scores for mild patients were MMSE 24.0 and MMSE 24.1 for the simufilam and placebo arms, respectively. Mean baseline ADAS-Cog scores for mild patients were 11.0 and 11.2 for the simufilam and placebo arms, respectively.

Simufilam for 18 months stabilized cognition in mild Alzheimer*’s disease–** ***After taking open-label simufilam for 12 months, 76 patients with mild Alzheimer’s disease (MMSE 21-26) enrolled in the randomized, withdrawal phase and were randomized to receive either simufilam (N=40) or placebo (N=36) for 6 months. Mild patients randomized to simufilam in the CMS showed no material decline in ADAS-Cog scores over 18 months as a group, indicating stable cognition. Mild patients randomized to placebo in the randomized, withdrawal phase (and therefore withdrawn from simufilam treatment for 6 months) declined by 0.8 points in ADAS-Cog over 18 months as a group. See Figure 4.

Figure 4. Historical declines on ADAS-Cog over 18 months in Alzheimer's disease (MMSE 20-30), placebo arms vs simufilam treatment.

Figure 4: Forest plot by Pentara Corporation, independent biostatisticians. Data was sourced from the placebo groups in randomized, controlled trials of monoclonal antibodies conducted by other sponsors in Alzheimer’s disease (MMSE 20-30). Results shown for CLARITY P3 trial of lecanemab; EMERGE and ENGAGE P3 studies of aducanumab; and TRAILBLAZER P3 trial of donanemab; in this figure, the randomized, withdrawal phase is referred to as the ‘PTI-125-04’ study; ‘Simufilam100mg-Simufilam100mg’ refers to patients who received simufilam in both the open-label phase and the randomized, withdrawal phase; ‘Simufilam100mg-Placebo’ refers to patients who received simufilam in the open-label phase and placebo in the randomized, withdrawal phase.

Safety Data – Simufilam 100 mg tablets twice daily appeared safe and well tolerated in the 6-month the randomized, withdrawal phase of the 24 month safety study.

Discussion –Patients who completed 12 months of open-label simufilam treatment were invited to participate in the randomized, withdrawal phase. It is not known how long a washout period may be needed to remove lingering drug effects, if any, from prior treatment with open-label simufilam for 12 months. In this small randomized, withdrawal study phase in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s disease, simufilam slowed cognitive decline by 38% on ADAS-Cog over six months (not statistically significant), with good drug safety. Effects were pronounced in mild patients. Mean baseline MMSE and ADAS-Cog scores were approximately balanced given the small size of each arm.

Study Results for the 24-Month Safety Study

In February 2024, we reported top-line results of the 24-month clinical safety study. Average changes in ADAS-Cog scores, baseline to month 24, indicate the following:

Patients with mild Alzheimer’s disease (n=87) started the 24 months study with MMSE 21-26, with ten exceptions. Patients with moderate Alzheimer’s started the 24 months study with MMSE 16-20, with one patient who entered with MMSE 15.

The pre-specified cognition endpoints were analyzed on the Full Analysis Set (FAS) by an independent consulting firm that specializes in complex statistical analysis of clinical trial results. The FAS population consists of all study participants who received at least one dose of treatment and have both baseline and at least one post-baseline assessment. (Because FAS data is specific to each phase of a study, the FAS for the 24-month study may differ from the FAS for other study phases).

Mild patients who received simufilam for 24 continuous months (n=47) showed an average change of 0.07 points on ADAS-Cog11 (± 1.51 SE), baseline to month 24, as a group.

Mild Alzheimer’s patients who received 12 months of open-label simufilam, followed by placebo in the 6-month randomized, placebo-controlled withdrawal phase, followed by an additional 6 months of open-label simufilam (n=40), declined by an average of 1.04 points on ADAS-Cog11 (± 1.65 SE), baseline to month 24, as a group. See Figure 4B.

Mean ADAS-Cog scores at baseline were approximately balanced in the group of mild Alzheimer’s patients who received drug continuously versus non-continuously (15.2 and 14.6, respectively).

Safety Data– Oral simufilam 100 mg tablets twice daily appeared safe and well tolerated in this study. There were no drug-related serious adverse events. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were Covid-19 and urinary tract infection.

End-of-Phase 2 (EOP2) Meeting with FDA

In January 2021, we held an End-of-phase 2 (EOP2) meeting for simufilam with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The purpose of this EOP2 meeting was to gain general agreement around key elements of a pivotal Phase 3 program to treat Alzheimer’s disease dementia. FDA attendees included Robert Temple, MD, Deputy Center Director for Clinical Science and Senior Advisor in the Office of New Drugs; Billy Dunn, MD, Director, Office of Neuroscience; Eric Bastings, MD, Director, Division of Neurology, and others.

In February 2021, we announced the successful completion of our EOP2 meeting. Official meeting minutes confirm that we and FDA are aligned on key elements of a Phase 3 clinical program for simufilam. FDA agreed that the completed Phase 2 program, together with an ongoing and well-defined Phase 3 clinical program, are sufficient to potentially show evidence of clinical efficacy for simufilam in Alzheimer’s disease. There was also agreement that the use of separate clinical scales to assess cognition (ADAS-cog 1) and function (ADCS-ADL 2) are appropriate endpoints of efficacy. iADRS 3 is an efficacy endpoint that combines scores for ADAS-cog and ADCS-ADL, and thereby provide a single composite measure of cognition and health function. Other endpoints include the NPI 4.

1* ADAS-Cog = The Alzheimer*’s Disease Assessment Scale–* Cognitive Subscale, a measure of cognition*

2* ADCS-ADL = Alzheimer*’s Disease Cooperative Study–* Activities of Daily Living, a measure of health function*

3**iADRS = integrated Alzheimer’s Disease Rating Scale, a composite measure of cognition and health function

4**NPI = Neuropsychiatric Inventory, a clinical tool that assesses the presence and severity of dementia-related behavior

Special Protocol Assessments

In August 2021, we announced we had reached agreement with FDA under a Special Protocol Assessment (SPA) for both Phase 3 studies. These SPA agreements document that FDA has reviewed and agreed upon the key design features of our Phase 3 study protocols of simufilam for the treatment of patients with Alzheimer’s disease.

An SPA agreement indicates concurrence by the FDA with the adequacy and acceptability of specific critical elements of overall protocol design (e.g., entry criteria, dose selection, endpoints, etc.). These elements are critical to ensure that our planned Phase 3 studies of simufilam in Alzheimer’s disease can

potentially be considered adequate and well-controlled studies in support of a future regulatory submission and marketing application.

The first clinical study protocol under the SPA is titled “A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Parallel-Group, 52-Week Study Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of One Dose of Simufilam in Subjects with Mild-to-Moderate Alzheimer’s Disease.”

The second clinical study protocol under the SPA is titled “A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Parallel-Group, 76-Week Study Evaluating the Safety and Efficacy of Two Doses of Simufilam in Subjects with Mild-to-Moderate Alzheimer’s Disease.”

Phase 3 Clinical Program Overview

Our Phase 3 program consists of two large, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled studies of simufilam in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s disease dementia. Both studies are designed to measure changes in cognition and function during their treatment period. Some highlights of this clinical program are summarized in Figure 5.

Premier Research International is the CRO supporting the conduct of our Phase 3 clinical program. Our Phase 3 clinical sites are currently located in the United States, Canada, Puerto Rico, Australia, and South Korea.

Figure 5. Summary of Our Phase 3 Clinical Program

RETHINK-ALZ and REFOCUS-ALZ

In Fall 2021, we announced initiation of two Phase 3 studies of simufilam in mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s disease dementia. In November 2023, we had announced the completion of patient enrollment in both Phase 3 studies. A total of approximately 1,900 patients are randomized into these studies. Approximately 70% of randomized patients entered our Phase 3 studies with mild Alzheimer’s disease (MMSE 20 to 27).

The first Phase 3 study, called RETHINK-ALZ, is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of oral simufilam 100 mg over 52 weeks (NCT04994483). Details of the RETHINK-ALZ Phase 3 study include:

Our second Phase 3 study, called REFOCUS-ALZ, is designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of oral simufilam 100 mg and 50 mg over 76 weeks (NCT05026177). Details of the REFOCUS-ALZ Phase 3 study include:

Phase 3 Entry Criteria

In our Phase 3 clinical studies, eligibility criteria are the requirements that patients must meet to be included in a study. These requirements help make sure that study participants are substantially and closely matched as a group in terms of specific factors such as age, disease or stage of disease, general health, and other key factors. Eligibility criteria can consist of inclusion criteria, which are required for a person to participate in the study, or exclusion criteria, which prevent a person from participating. See Figure 5A.

Use of Plasma Phosphorylated-tau181 (p‐tau181)

We believe plasma p‐tau181 is a biomarker qualifier of Alzheimer’s neuropathology. RETHINK-ALZ and REFOCUS-ALZ Phase 3 studies use a ‘research use only’, non-safety related exploratory p-tau181 plasma assay to qualify mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s patients. The plasma assay we use does not rely on age, APOE-gene status or complex algorithms to provide a result. P-Tau181 testing was performed by an independent commercial laboratory.

Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB)

In September 2023, we announced that a routine, scheduled meeting of a DSMB recommended that both of our Phase 3 studies continue as planned, without modification. This DSMB only reviewed patient safety. It did not assess drug efficacy.

Interim MRI Safety Data

In October 2023, we announced a potentially significant safety finding based on interim magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) brain data from Alzheimer’s patients who are enrolled in a Phase 3 clinical trial of simufilam. These MRI data suggest simufilam is not associated with treatment-emergent amyloid-related imaging abnormalities, or ARIA. MRIs were all analyzed for ARIA by independent, board-certified neuroradiologists.

ARIA is a medical term used to describe a spectrum of brain MRI imaging abnormalities, such as brain swelling and brain bleeds. ARIA is a known risk factor for Alzheimer’s patients taking the class of drugs known as monoclonal antibodies directed against amyloid. In contrast to that class of drugs, simufilam is a small-molecule (oral) drug candidate.

The new safety finding is based on an independent, interim neuroradiological evaluation of brain MRIs taken at week 40 in a blinded sub-study of 180 Alzheimer’s patients enrolled in REFOCUS-ALZ, our on-going 76-week Phase 3 clinical trial of simufilam in mild-to-moderate Alzheimer’s. Final MRI data is expected at the conclusion of this Phase 3 study. See Figure 6.

Status of Phase 3 Clinical Program

Our Phase 3 trials have randomized a total of approximately 1,900 patients with mild to moderate stages of Alzheimer’s disease at baseline (MMSE 16-27), with approximately 800 patients randomized in the 52-week study (RETHINK-ALZ) and approximately 1,100 patients randomized in the 76-week study (REFOCUS-ALZ).

Approximately 70% of patients enrolled in our Phase 3 trials are diagnosed with mild Alzheimer’s disease (MMSE 20-27), with remaining patients entering the study with moderate disease (MMSE 16-19). Since the distribution of patients randomized in these trials is numerically skewed towards mild patients, we expect to rely predominantly on outcomes from mild patients to evaluate drug safety and efficacy.

Over 340 patients have completed the 52-week RETHINK-ALZ study. Over 215 patients have completed the 76-week REFOCUS-ALZ study, for a total of over 555 completers.

All efficacy data from our Phase 3 program remain blinded. There are no interim analyses on efficacy outcomes.

We anticipate top-line data readout for our 52-week study (RETHINK-ALZ) approximately year-end 2024.

We anticipate top-line data readout for our 76-week study (REFOCUS-ALZ) approximately mid-year 2025.

We have initiated a discussion with the FDA to finalize a statistical analysis plan (SAP), which is a formal document defining the detailed analysis that our independent biostatisticians will undertake as to efficacy data collected in our Phase 3 trials. The SAP includes in-depth technical details and descriptions on the intended clinical trial analysis, the statistical methods and models that will be used, the population being analyzed, the data variables that will be analyzed, how missing data will be accounted for, descriptions of covariates to be included in the statistical model, and other statistical factors, all of which will be prospectively defined, documented and finalized prior to unblinding of any efficacy outcomes.

Open-label Extension Study for the Phase 3 Program

In October 2022, we announced the initiation of an open-label extension study for our Phase 3 program. This study is designed to provide no-cost access to oral simufilam for up to one year to Alzheimer’s patients who have successfully completed a Phase 3 study of simufilam and who meet other entry criteria.

We expect the open-label extension study to generate additional long-term clinical safety data for oral simufilam 100 mg twice daily over 52 weeks. There is no obligation for a patient or a physician to participate in the open-label extension study. Each clinical investigational site and each patient chooses whether to participate in this open-label extension study.

Patient enrollment for this study began in November 2022. To date, over 500 patients entered the open-label extension study.

Phase 3 Drug Supply

We have a drug supply agreement with Evonik Industries AG for simufilam. Under the agreement, Evonik supplies and is expected to continue to supply us with large-scale, clinical-grade quantities of simufilam. Evonik is one of the world’s largest contract development and manufacturing organizations for pharmaceutical ingredients. Other vendors supply excipients, the finished dosage form (i.e., simufilam tablets), drug packaging, package labeling and other critical components of the supply chain for Phase 3 drug supply.

SavaDx

Our investigational product candidate, called SavaDx, is an early-stage program focused on detecting the presence of Alzheimer’s disease from a small sample of blood. For business, technical and personnel reasons, we continue to prioritize the development of simufilam, our novel drug candidate, over SavaDx, our novel diagnostic candidate. SavaDx is a research-use only, non-safety related exploratory biomarker. Development activity related to SavaDx accounts for less than 1% of our research budget.

Working with third parties, we continue to evaluate the use of mass spectrometry to detect FLNA or other proteins of interest. The data and information generated from these evaluations continues to be under review for potential intellectual property rights.

The regulatory pathway for SavaDx may eventually include formal analytical validation studies and clinical studies that support evidence of sensitivity, specificity and other variables in various healthy and diseased patient populations. We have not conducted such studies and do not expect to conduct such studies in 2024.

SavaDx is designed as an antibody-based detection system for altered filamin A (FLNA). Working with third parties, we are evaluating the use of mass spectrometry to detect FLNA, i.e., without the use of antibodies. These evaluations are on-going.

Over the past twelve years, we discovered that altered FLNA is a hallmark feature of brain pathology in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. We believe SavaDx may reveal early traces of the disease, potentially even before the overt appearance of disease symptoms, such as memory loss.

A diagnostic test usually measures one or more biomarkers, which are biological indicators of disease. A deep understanding of the biology of disease is required to identify and develop a diagnostic. A valid diagnostic has certain baseline characteristics to be functional and useful for clinical practice. It must detect disease in patients (sensitivity) and, conversely, not detect disease in healthy subjects (specificity); and it is preferably quantitative, giving some indication of severity or stage of disease. Collectively, the ability to selectively detect disease indicators can be useful to provide diagnostic information (i.e., detect the disease) or prognostic information (i.e., predict the disease or its future course).

Currently, the most definitive method to diagnose Alzheimer’s disease is through autopsy after death, which is not particularly helpful. Methods to detect Alzheimer’s disease during its course can be expensive, invasive, subjective, risky and/or uncomfortable. Importantly, because of the expense and invasiveness of current tests, most people are not tested until they show obvious cognitive decline.* *

Current approaches for diagnosing Alzheimer’s disease include measurement of amyloid-β (specifically, Aβ 42), total tau (T-tau) or phosphorylated tau (P-tau) levels in CSF or plasma; structural neuroimaging techniques, including magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computerized tomography (CT); positron-emission tomography (PET) imaging of brain amyloid (AmyVid®); and batteries of cognitive tests. Usually, a combination of more than one test is necessary to provide a working diagnosis. When such tests and techniques are used together, the totality of data can be sensitive and specific for the detection of Alzheimer’s disease. In practice, however, such tests and techniques are only used after overt symptoms of impaired memory.

We believe there is a profound need for a blood-based diagnostic test for Alzheimer’s disease. A quick, simple, inexpensive test may benefit the medical community in many ways. Advantages may include confirming the presence of Alzheimer’s disease earlier, when lifestyle changes and potential therapeutics may have the most impact, or conversely, to rule out Alzheimer’s disease at such early stages. Other potential benefits include discriminating Alzheimer’s disease from other causes of dementias; helping to identify stage of Alzheimer’s disease; selection and enrollment of appropriate patients into clinical studies of experimental product candidates; and better alignment of a patient’s specific diagnosis with a targeted therapeutic.

It is widely accepted that in Alzheimer’s disease, pathological changes in the brain occur at least 10-15 years before clinical symptoms appear. These “pre-symptomatic” changes include deposits of certain misfolded or impaired proteins in the brain. Our long-term goal with SavaDx is to identify people with Alzheimer’s disease, potentially long before clinical symptoms occur. Early detection may be critical for any intervention to cease – or at least slow down – brain damage before it is too late. Importantly, a non-invasive screen for latent Alzheimer’s disease prior to overt symptoms could be conducted as a general health screen, not just in patients at risk by family history or in patients already showing cognitive impairment. Once a disease-modifying treatment is found, early detection is likely to be critically important. Early detection and treatment may also be critical in identifying such a disease-modifying treatment, as many believe one reason for clinical study failures in Alzheimer’s disease is that treatment has routinely started too late in the course of disease to make any impact.

Moreover, with repeat measurements over time, SavaDx may provide a probability of cognitive decline or disease progression. Even if SavaDx does not provide a precise numerical cutoff value for Alzheimer’s disease, we believe it may be important to incorporate data from SavaDx into the overall diagnostic framework for neurodegeneration, and Alzheimer’s disease in particular. As with any diagnosis of disease, some people may embrace a way to detect Alzheimer’s disease long before clinical symptoms appear, while others may prefer not to know – at least until better treatments are found.

Diagnostic development program.

Diagnostic development differs from drug development in many important ways. As a result, diagnostic development requires substantial differences in planning, study design and study execution.

Some of the ways that diagnostic development differs from drug development include the following:

SavaDx is an investigational diagnostic product candidate that has not yet been reviewed by FDA. Early clinical testing consisted of collecting blood samples on a limited scale to test and validate SavaDx using antibodies or mass spectrometry. Our ability to test such samples and generate accurate results depends on multiple factors, many of which are beyond our control. For example, optimal sample collection depends on risk of sample degradation, storage requirements to preserve samples, cost of sample storage and actual vs. predicted time of assay validation.

We have conducted four early validation tests using SavaDx. In three blinded studies of test samples, SavaDx detected more than a 10-fold separation between Alzheimer’s patients and normal healthy control subjects (N=232 test samples). In these three proof-of-concept studies, SavaDx demonstrated nearly 100% accuracy and specificity. The three studies deployed a research grade antibody manufactured by an outside vendor.

A fourth blinded study of SavaDx failed to generate meaningful diagnostic data. We believe the fourth study deployed a faulty research antibody sourced from an outside vendor. Commercially available research antibodies can present certain technical flaws, such as improper validation, significant batch-to-batch variations or inconsistent storage, any of which can jeopardize results of studies and experiments.

In July 2021, we announced positive clinical data with SavaDx when used to measure plasma levels of altered filamin A before and after simufilam treatment in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. In a Phase 2b randomized, controlled trial sponsored by the National Institutes of Health (NIH), simufilam significantly reduced a plasma marker of altered filamin A in Alzheimer’s patients treated for 28 days. Plasma levels of p-tau181 also dropped significantly in these same patients, as measured by Quanterix Corporation, a third-party vendor.

SavaDx is currently designed as an antibody-based detection system for filamin A (FLNA). Working with third parties, we are evaluating the use of mass spectrometry to detect FLNA, i.e., without the use of antibodies. These evaluations are on-going.

The legal system for intellectual property around diagnostic methods is highly complex and uncertain. In the U.S., patent courts have struggled to define a clear means of patent eligibility for modern age diagnostics. Generally, a simple process involving correlations between blood test results and patient health is not eligible for patent claims because such processes incorporate “laws of nature”. However, different outcomes from different courts, including Federal Circuit, district court and Patent Trial and Appeal Board decisions, have continued to create a sometimes vague or conflicting legal framework for determining the eligibility of patent claims for diagnostic methods. As a result, we cannot be certain how SavaDx fits into the current U.S. legal framework for obtaining effective patent claims. Furthermore, claims for diagnostic methods can be complicated to enforce.

We currently have no issued patents in the United States with respect to SavaDx.

Expansion of Our Science to Other Indications

Protein misfolds occur in a wide variety of biological processes and diseases. We may leverage our scientific insights in neurodegeneration and neuroinflammation and advanced tools in molecular biology, biochemistry, and imaging to expand our science to other diseases. New indications and new drug development approaches may complement our initial focus on Alzheimer’s disease.

Preclinical programs are always visionary, sometimes innovative and often of high biomedical potential. By definition, such programs are exploratory and risky. Most preclinical programs fail for scientific or other reasons, regardless of the amount of effort or resources that are brought to bear. For these reasons, we do not intend to disclose our preclinical programs until they become material to our pipeline of product candidates.

We Own Worldwide Rights to Our Neurodegeneration Program

We own intellectual property, including patents, patent applications, technology, trade secrets and know-how in the U.S. and other countries. The protection of patents, designs, trademarks and other proprietary rights that we own or license is critical to our success and competitive position. We consider the overall protection of our patents and other intellectual property rights to be of material value and act to protect these rights from infringement.

We seek to protect our technology by, among other methods, filing and prosecuting U.S. and foreign patents and patent applications with respect to our technology and products and their uses. The focus of our patent strategy is to secure and maintain intellectual property rights to technology for our program in neurodegeneration.

Simufilam was discovered and designed in-house and was characterized by our academic collaborators during research activities that were conducted from approximately 2008 to date. SavaDx is being developed in-house with outside collaborators. We own exclusive, worldwide rights to those drug and diagnostic assets and related technologies, without royalty obligations to any third party. Our patent protection with respect to simufilam and use of simufilam for Alzheimer’s disease and other neurodegenerative diseases currently runs through 2039 and includes nine issued U.S. patents. In addition, we have patent protection with respect to simufilam for use in treating certain cancers that runs through 2033. Our patent estate further includes patents and patent applications for related compounds and treatments. Corresponding foreign filings have been made for each of the U.S. filings.

Our Development Team

Our product development team is led by seasoned professionals with a proven track record of innovation in drug discovery and development, as well as substantial business expertise.

Our Founder and Chief Executive Officer, Remi Barbier, has over 25 years of biopharmaceutical industry experience and has led teams responsible for pioneering several pharmaceutical innovations, including abuse-deterrent technology for opioid drugs; the clinical development of multiple pain drug candidates; an innovative antibody program in cancer; and other programs in neuroscience and other therapeutics areas. Before founding Cassava Sciences, he held leadership roles and was founder or co-founder of three life science companies, all of which are now either publicly traded or were acquired.

Our Chief Medical Officer, James Kupiec, MD, has participated in research programs that led to two FDA drug approvals prior to Cassava Sciences. He previously served at Pfizer, Inc. as VP, Global Clinical Leader for Parkinson’s Disease and Clinical Head of the Neuroscience Research Unit. Dr. Kupiec also held leadership roles at Sanofi and Ciba-Geigy Pharmaceuticals and before that was a practicing neurologist.

Lindsay Burns, PhD, SVP, Neuroscience, reports to Dr. Kupiec and has worked on the development of several product candidates in neuroscience and other therapeutics areas while at Neurex (acquired by Elan Pharmaceuticals) and Abgenix (acquired by Amgen).

Michael Zamloot, SVP of Technology Operations, has participated in research programs that led to four FDA drug approvals prior to Cassava Sciences. He previously worked in drug operations and supply chain management at Boehringer Mannheim (acquired by Roche Diagnostics), Athena Neuroscience (acquired by Elan Pharmaceuticals) and Ciba-Geigy (acquired by Novartis).

Michael Marsman, PharmD, SVP of Regulatory Affairs previously held senior positions at Impax Laboratories, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, and Syntex, where he had shared responsibility for the regulatory approval of several high-profile drugs. He also previously led regulatory affairs for our Company for nearly a decade until 2019.

George (Ben) Thornton, PhD, SVP of Technology, has led research and development teams at Johnson & Johnson as well as translated basic science to the clinical setting at biotechnology start-ups such as GeneMedicine and Apovia.

Our management team is further supported by scientific advisors who are leading experts in the field and share our commitment to advancing new treatments for neurodegenerative diseases, including Alzheimer’s disease.

Our Strategy

Our goal is to develop product candidates to diagnose and treat neurodegeneration, such as Alzheimer’s disease. Key elements of our business strategy to achieve this mission include:

We also conduct basic research and development in collaboration with academic and other partners. Our research and development expenses were $89.4 million, $68.0 million and $24.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021, respectively. See “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” for additional details regarding our research and development activities.

Competition

The drug discovery and development industry is characterized by rapidly advancing technologies, intense competition and a strong emphasis on proprietary products. We face potential competition from many different sources, including pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic institutions, governmental agencies, and public and private research institutions. Any product candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize, such as simufilam or SavaDx, may compete with existing therapies and new therapies that may become available in the future.

Historically, the drug industry has attempted to treat Alzheimer’s disease by developing drugs that block the synthesis of, or remove or disaggregate, beta amyloid and, more recently, another protein in the brain called tau. Essentially, the prevailing doctrine holds that amyloid (or tau) must be cleared out of the brain. This scientific approach has been repeatedly tested by our competitors in late-stage clinical studies using a variety of antibody backbones, epitopes and target conformations in various stages of disease. More recent competitors in Alzheimer’s research are focused on modulating proteins in the brain that have anti-inflammatory or other properties.

In contrast, our scientific approach seeks to simultaneously improve neurodegeneration and neuroinflammation. We believe improving multiple vital functions in the brain represents a new, different and crucial approach to address Alzheimer’s disease.

Regardless of scientific approach, improvement or stability in cognition and health function remains a key criterion for a new drug in Alzheimer’s disease to receive full, unconditional marketing approval from the FDA.

Our competitors may have significantly greater financial resources, an established presence in the market, expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical and clinical testing, obtaining regulatory approvals and reimbursement and marketing-approved products. These competitors compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and technical personnel, establishing clinical study sites and patient registration for clinical studies, as well as in acquiring or developing technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies, significant financial backing from large investors and/or access to intellectual property from large established companies.

The key competitive factors affecting the success of simufilam, and any other product candidates that we develop to address neurodegenerative disorders, if approved, are likely to be their efficacy, safety, convenience, price, the level of generic competition, patient and physician acceptance and the availability of reimbursement from government and other third-party payors. Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient or are less expensive than products that we may develop.

Our competitors may develop and obtain FDA approval for their products more rapidly than us. For example, the FDA approved Biogen’s aducanumab (human monoclonal antibody) for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease using an accelerated approval pathway, although its development and commercialization was subsequently discontinued by Biogen in January 2024. More recently, in January 2023, lecanemab (humanized version of a mouse monoclonal antibody, marketed as Leqembi®), which is a proprietary drug of Eisai R&D Management Co., Ltd. and Biogen, Inc., received marketing approval from the FDA for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease using an accelerated approval pathway and in July 2023, the FDA granted lecanemab full approval for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease. In addition, we believe Eli Lilly’s donanemab drug is poised for a potential FDA approval in the first half of 2024 in patients with early Alzheimer’s disease. Each of the foregoing drugs is currently delivered by infusion.

Other currently marketed drugs, called cholinesterase inhibitors, focus solely on treating symptoms mostly in patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease. The Alzheimer’s brain has low levels of a neurotransmitter called acetylcholine. Cholinesterase inhibitors prevent an enzyme in the brain, called acetylcholinesterase, from breaking down acetylcholine. Currently marketed cholinesterase inhibitors include donepezil (marketed by Eisai Co., Ltd. and Pfizer, Inc. as Aricept®), rivastigmine (marketed by Novartis AG as Exelon®) and galantamine (marketed by Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. as Razadyne®). Cholinesterase inhibitors may benefit some patients for several months, after which the targeted brain receptors are desensitized, and drug efficacy is lost. Another approved medication for treating the symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease is memantine, a non-competitive antagonist of NMDA receptors (marketed by Lundbeck as Namenda®).

In recent years, we have observed ramped-up worldwide efforts aimed at developing blood-based techniques to detect and monitor Alzheimer’s disease. The key competitive factors affecting the success of SavaDx, and any other product candidates that we develop to diagnose neurodegeneration, if approved, are likely to be their measure of accuracy, such as specificity and sensitivity, as well as their convenience, patient acceptance, price and the availability of reimbursement from government and other third-party payors. Our competitors in the diagnostic area are pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic institutions and governmental agencies and public and private research institutions. Despite increased research effort, the field has generally been hampered by lack of reproducibility and an unclear path on how to move academic discoveries into clinical utilization.

In addition to blood-based techniques to detect Alzheimer’s disease, competitors are examining the use of novel tracing agents and imaging techniques to map the course of neurodegeneration. In 2012, FDA approved Amyvid® (Eli Lilly Pharmaceuticals), which is a radioactive diagnostic agent for brain imaging of amyloid plaque. Amyvid can rule out Alzheimer’s disease but does not confirm its presence. That is, a negative scan means little or no plaque is present; however, a positive scan does not necessarily indicate Alzheimer’s disease. In addition, Amyvid cannot be used to stage Alzheimer’s disease because some people take years to show cognitive decline after amyloid plaque develops, while other others rapidly develop advanced Alzheimer’s disease within months.

Manufacturing

Simufilam and any future product candidates must be manufactured for clinical trial use in compliance with current good manufacturing practices (cGMP) regulations. These regulations are extensive, stringent and complex, and may include requirements regarding the organization of personnel, buildings and facilities, equipment, control of components and drug product containers and closures, production and process controls, packaging and labeling controls, holding and distribution, laboratory controls, records and reports, and returned or salvaged products. Our manufacturing vendors must have facilities to make our product candidates in strict compliance with cGMP requirements and the FDA’s or comparable foreign regulatory authorities’ satisfaction. Our third-party vendors may also be subject to periodic and unannounced inspections of their respective facilities for general cGMP compliance by the FDA and other foreign authorities. These inspections may include review of procedures and operations used in the testing and manufacture of simufilam to assess compliance with applicable regulations. Failure to comply with statutory and regulatory requirements subjects a manufacturer to possible legal or regulatory action, including warning letters, the seizure or recall of products, injunctions, consent decrees placing significant restrictions on or suspending manufacturing operations and civil and criminal penalties. Contract manufacturers often encounter difficulties involving production yields, quality control and quality assurance, as well as shortages of qualified personnel. Any of these actions or events could have a material impact on the availability of simufilam. Our suppliers may be forced to stop producing, storing, shipping or testing our drug product candidates if they fall out of compliance with government regulations and standards.

Although we are ultimately responsible for the manufacture of simufilam and any other future product candidates, we have limited or no control over our suppliers’ compliance, or lack thereof, with the multitude of regulations and standards that affect our drug products. We cannot control decisions by our suppliers that affect their ability or willingness to continue to supply us on acceptable terms, or at all.

We do not own or lease any manufacturing facilities. We outsource formulation, manufacturing and related activities to third parties. For the foreseeable future, we will continue to rely on third parties to conduct certain quality control and assurance testing, shipping or storage of our product candidates.

We currently rely on one non-affiliated contract development and manufacturing organization (CDMO)—Evonik Corporation—to manufacture simufilam and expect to continue to do so. In 2021, we entered into an agreement with Evonik Corporation to supply large-scale, clinical-grade quantities of drug substance for simufilam.

We believe our manufacturing strategy will continue to provide sufficient drug supply for our Phase 3 program, including both drug substance (i.e., active ingredient) and drug product (i.e., oral tablets). The goal of our manufacturing strategy is to ensure the integrity of the supply chain for drug substance in compliance with FDA standards. We believe raw materials for our drug product are readily available from reliable sources.

Government Regulation

Our operations are subject to various levels of governmental controls and regulations in the United States and in other countries where we operate, including Canada, South Korea and Australia. We attempt to comply with all legal requirements in the conduct of our operations and employ business practices that we consider to be prudent under the circumstances in which we operate. Government authorities in the U.S. (federal, state and local), Canada, South Korea, Australia and other countries regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, approval, labeling, packaging, storage, record-keeping, promotion, advertising, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, marketing and export and import of drug and diagnostic products. Generally, before a new drug or diagnostic can be marketed, considerable data demonstrating its quality, safety and efficacy and/or specificity must be obtained, organized into a format specific for each regulatory authority, submitted for review and approved by each regulatory authority.

U.S. Drug Development

In the U.S., FDA regulates drugs under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA). Both drugs and diagnostics also are subject to other federal, state and local statutes and regulations. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations requires the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Failure to comply with the applicable U.S. requirements at any time during the product development process, approval process or post-market may subject an applicant to administrative or judicial sanctions. These sanctions could include, among other actions, FDA’s refusal to approve pending applications, withdrawal of an approval, a clinical hold, untitled or warning letters, product recalls or market withdrawals, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, restitution, disgorgement and civil or criminal penalties. Any agency or judicial enforcement action could have a material adverse effect on us.

Product candidates must be approved by FDA before they may be commercialized in the U.S. The drug approval process generally includes the following sequence of steps:

The data required to support an NDA are generated in two distinct developmental stages: preclinical and clinical. The preclinical and clinical testing and approval process requires substantial time, effort and financial resources, and we cannot be certain that any approvals for any future product candidates will be granted on a timely basis, or at all.

Preclinical Studies and IND

The preclinical developmental stage generally involves laboratory evaluations of drug chemistry, formulation and stability, as well as studies to evaluate toxicity in animals, which support subsequent clinical testing. As sponsor, we must submit the results of the preclinical studies, together with manufacturing information, analytical data, any available clinical data or literature and a proposed clinical protocol, to FDA as part of the IND. An IND is a request for authorization from FDA to administer an investigational product to humans and must become effective before human clinical studies may begin.

Preclinical studies include laboratory evaluation of product chemistry and formulation, as well as* *in vitro and animal studies to assess the potential for adverse events and in some cases to establish a rationale for therapeutic use. The conduct of preclinical studies is subject to federal regulations and requirements, including cGCP regulations for safety/toxicology studies. An IND sponsor must submit the results of the preclinical tests, together with manufacturing information, analytical data, any available clinical data or literature and plans for clinical studies, among other things, to FDA as part of an IND. Some long-term preclinical testing, such as long-term toxicity tests, animal tests of reproductive adverse events and carcinogenicity, may continue after the IND is submitted. An IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by FDA, unless before that time FDA raises concerns or questions about any aspect of the program. In such a case, the IND sponsor and FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical study can begin.

Clinical Studies

The clinical stage of development involves the administration of the investigational product to healthy volunteers or patients under the supervision of qualified investigators, generally physicians not employed by or under the study sponsor’s control, in accordance with cGCP requirements, which include the requirement that all research subjects provide their informed consent for their participation in any clinical trial. Clinical studies are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the clinical trial, dosing procedures, subject selection and exclusion criteria and the parameters to be used to monitor subject safety and assess efficacy. Each protocol, and any subsequent amendments to the protocol, must be submitted to FDA as part of the IND. Furthermore, each clinical study must be reviewed and approved by an IRB for each institution at which the clinical study will be conducted to ensure that the risks to individuals participating in the clinical studies are minimized and are reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits. The IRB also approves the informed consent form that must be provided to each clinical study subject or his or her legal representative and must monitor the clinical study until completed. There also are requirements governing the reporting of ongoing clinical studies and completed clinical study results to public registries.

A sponsor who wishes to conduct a clinical study outside of the U.S. may, but need not, obtain FDA authorization to conduct the clinical study under an IND. If a foreign clinical study is not conducted under an IND, the sponsor may submit data from the clinical study to FDA in support of an NDA. The FDA may accept a well-designed and well-conducted foreign clinical study not conducted under an IND if the study was conducted in accordance with cGCP requirements and FDA is able to validate the data through an onsite inspection if deemed necessary. We currently have clinical sites outside of the U.S. in Canada, Puerto Rico, South Korea and Australia.

Clinical studies in the U.S. generally are conducted in three sequential phases, known as Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 3, and may overlap.

Post-approval studies, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 clinical studies, may be conducted after initial marketing approval. These studies are used to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication. In certain instances, FDA may mandate the performance of Phase 4 clinical studies as a condition of approval of an NDA.

Progress reports detailing the results of the clinical studies, among other information, must be submitted at least annually to FDA. Written safety reports and the investigations for serious and unexpected adverse events, or any other findings suggesting a significant risk to humans exposed to the drug must be submitted to FDA.

Phase 1, Phase 2, and Phase 3 clinical studies may not be completed successfully within any specified period, if at all. The FDA or the sponsor may suspend or terminate a clinical study at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research subjects or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an IRB can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical study at its institution if the clinical study is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements or if the drug has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients. Additionally, some clinical studies are overseen by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the clinical study sponsor, known as a Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB). This group provides authorization for whether a study may move forward at designated check-points based on access to certain data from the trial. Concurrent with clinical studies, companies usually complete additional animal studies and must develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the drug as well as finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product and, among other things, companies must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the final product. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested, and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that our product candidates do not undergo unacceptable deterioration over their shelf life.

NDA Review Process

Following completion of the clinical studies, data is analyzed to assess whether the investigational product is safe and effective for the proposed indicated use or uses. The results of preclinical studies and clinical studies are then submitted to FDA as part of an NDA, along with proposed labeling, chemistry and manufacturing information to ensure product quality and other relevant data. In short, the NDA is a request for approval to market a drug for one or more specified indication and must contain proof of safety and efficacy for a drug’s purity and potency. The application may include both negative and ambiguous results of preclinical studies and clinical studies, as well as positive findings. Data may come from company-sponsored clinical studies intended to test the safety and efficacy of a product’s use or from several alternative sources, including studies initiated by investigators. To support marketing approval, the data submitted must be sufficient in quality and quantity to establish the safety and efficacy of the investigational product to the satisfaction of FDA. FDA approval of an NDA must be obtained before a drug may be marketed in the U.S.

Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA), as amended, each NDA must be accompanied by a user fee. FDA adjusts the PDUFA user fees on an annual basis. According to FDA’s fiscal year 2024 fee schedule, effective through September 30, 2024, the user fee for an application requiring clinical data, such as an NDA, is approximately $4.0 million. Fee waivers or reductions are available in certain circumstances, including a waiver of the application fee for the first application filed by a small business. Additionally, no user fees are assessed on NDAs for products designated as orphan drugs, unless the product also includes a non-orphan indication.

The FDA reviews all submitted NDAs before it accepts them for filing and may request additional information rather than accept the NDA for filing. The FDA must decide whether to accept an NDA for filing within 60 days of receipt. Once the submission is accepted for filing, FDA begins an in-depth review of the NDA. Under the goals and policies agreed to by FDA under PDUFA, FDA has 10 months, from the filing date, in which to complete its initial review of a new molecular-entity NDA and respond to the applicant, and six months from the filing date of a new molecular-entity NDA designated for priority review. The FDA does not always meet its PDUFA goal dates for standard and priority NDAs, and the review process is often extended by FDA requests for additional information or clarification.

Before approving an NDA, FDA may conduct a pre-approval inspection of the manufacturing facilities for the new product to determine whether they comply with cGMP requirements. The FDA will not approve the product unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities fully comply with cGMP requirements and are adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. The FDA also may audit data from clinical studies to ensure compliance with cGCP requirements. Additionally, FDA may refer applications for novel product candidates which present difficult questions of safety or efficacy to an advisory committee, typically a panel that includes clinicians and other experts, for review, evaluation and a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and under what conditions, if any. The FDA is not bound by recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations when making decisions on approval. The FDA likely will reanalyze the clinical study data, which could result in extensive discussions between FDA and the applicant during the review process. After FDA evaluates an NDA, it will issue either an approval letter or a Complete Response Letter (CRL). An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the drug with specific prescribing information for specific indications. A CRL indicates that FDA’s review of the application is complete and the application cannot be approved in its present form. A CRL usually describes the specific deficiencies in the NDA identified by FDA. The CRL may require additional clinical data, additional pivotal Phase 3 clinical trial(s) and/or other significant and time-consuming requirements related to clinical studies, preclinical studies or manufacturing. If a CRL is issued, the applicant may either resubmit the NDA, addressing all the deficiencies identified in the CRL, or withdraw the application. Even if such data and information are submitted, FDA may decide that the NDA does not satisfy the criteria for approval. Data obtained from clinical studies are not always conclusive and FDA may interpret data differently than we interpret the same data.

Commercialization Plan

Our product candidates have not received marketing approval from the FDA, and we do not expect to have any approved product candidates in the near term. We currently have no company experience in marketing drugs and have no personnel, capabilities or infrastructure in sales, marketing, third-party payor programs or commercial product distribution. When and if any of our product candidates are approved for commercialization, we will need to develop a commercialization infrastructure for any such product in the U.S. and potentially in certain other key markets. As a matter of strategy, we may also rely on partnerships or collaborations with larger biopharmaceutical companies to provide commercialization infrastructure, such as sales and marketing and commercial distribution.

Advertising and Promotion

The FDA and other federal regulatory agencies closely regulate the marketing and promotion of drugs through, among other things, standards and regulations for direct-to-consumer advertising, communications regarding unapproved uses, industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities, and promotional activities involving the Internet. None of our product candidates can be commercially promoted before receiving FDA approval. After approval, product promotion can include only those claims relating to safety and effectiveness that are consistent with the labeling approved by FDA. Healthcare providers are permitted to prescribe drugs for “off-label” uses — that is, uses not approved by FDA and therefore not described in the drug’s labeling — because FDA does not regulate the practice of medicine. However, FDA regulations impose stringent restrictions on manufacturers’ communications regarding off-label uses. Failure to comply with applicable FDA requirements and restrictions in this area may subject us to adverse publicity and enforcement action by FDA, the U.S. Department of Justice, or the Office of the Inspector General of Health and Human Services, as well as state authorities. This could subject us to a range of penalties that could have a significant commercial impact, including civil and criminal fines and agreements that materially restrict the manner in which we promote or distribute our product candidates.

Post-Approval Requirements

After a product candidate receives regulatory approval, it is often subject to pervasive and continuing regulation by FDA, including, among other things, requirements relating to drug listing and registration, recordkeeping, periodic reporting, product sampling and distribution, adverse event reporting and advertising, marketing and promotion restrictions.

Adverse event reporting and submission of periodic reports is required following FDA approval of an NDA. The FDA also may require post-market testing, known as Phase 4 testing, or FDA may place conditions on an approval that could restrict the distribution or use of the product. In addition, quality control, drug manufacture, packaging, and labeling procedures must continue to conform to cGMP after approval. Drug manufacturers and certain of their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with FDA and certain state agencies. Registration may result in periodic announced or unannounced inspections by FDA or these state agencies, during which the agency inspects manufacturing facilities to assess compliance with cGMP. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money, and effort in the areas of production and quality control to maintain compliance with cGMP. Regulatory authorities may withdraw product approvals or request product recalls if a company fails to comply with regulatory standards, if it encounters problems following initial marketing, or if previously unrecognized problems are subsequently discovered. In addition, other regulatory actions may be taken, including, among other things, warning letters, the seizure of products, injunctions, consent decrees placing significant restrictions on or suspending manufacturing operations, refusal to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications, civil penalties, and criminal prosecution.

The FDA may require post-approval clinical studies to help assure continued safety or effectiveness of the approved drug. The FDA may also require a labeling change if it becomes aware of new safety information that it believes should be included in the labeling of a drug.

In addition to the FDA, manufacturing, sales, promotion and other activities following product approval are also subject to regulation by numerous regulatory authorities in the U.S., including the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, other divisions of the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Justice, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Federal Trade Commission, the Occupational Safety & Health Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and state and local governments.

For example, in the United States, sales, marketing and scientific and educational programs must also comply with state and federal fraud and abuse laws. These laws include the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which makes it illegal for any person, including a prescription drug manufacturer (or a party acting on its behalf), to knowingly and willfully solicit, receive, offer or pay any remuneration that is intended to induce or reward referrals, including the purchase, recommendation, order or prescription of a particular drug, for which payment may be made under a federal healthcare program, such as Medicare or Medicaid. Violations of this law are punishable by prison, criminal fines, administrative civil money penalties and exclusion from participation in federal healthcare programs. Moreover, the ACA provides that the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the False Claims Act.

Pricing and rebate programs must comply with the Medicaid rebate requirements of the U.S. Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 and more recent requirements in the ACA. If products are made available to authorized users of the Federal Supply Schedule of the General Services Administration, additional laws and requirements apply. Products must meet applicable child-resistant packaging requirements under the U.S. Poison Prevention Packaging Act. Manufacturing, sales, promotion and other activities also are potentially subject to federal and state consumer protection and unfair competition laws.

The distribution of pharmaceutical products is subject to additional requirements and regulations, including extensive record-keeping, licensing, storage and security requirements intended to prevent the unauthorized sale of pharmaceutical products.

The failure to comply with any of these laws or regulatory requirements subjects firms to possible legal or regulatory action. Depending on the circumstances, failure to meet applicable regulatory requirements can result in criminal prosecution, fines or other penalties, injunctions, requests for recall, seizure of products, total or partial suspension of production, denial or withdrawal of product approvals or refusal to allow a firm to enter into supply contracts, including government contracts. Any action against us for violation of these laws, even if we successfully defend against it, could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business. Prohibitions or restrictions on sales or withdrawal of future products marketed by us could materially affect our business in an adverse way.

Changes in regulations, statutes or the interpretation of existing regulations could impact our business in the future by requiring, for example: changes to our manufacturing arrangements; additions or modifications to product labeling, if and when approved; the recall or discontinuation of our products; or additional record-keeping requirements. If any such changes were to be imposed, they could adversely affect the operation of our business.

The Hatch-Waxman Amendments

Orange Book Listing

In seeking approval for our product candidates through an NDA, we will be required to list with FDA each patent whose claims cover the drug product. Upon receiving regulatory approval, each of the patents listed in the application for this drug is then published in FDA’s Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations, commonly known as the “Orange Book.” Drugs listed in the Orange Book can, in turn, be cited by potential generic competitors in support of approval of an abbreviated NDA, or ANDA. An ANDA provides for marketing of a drug product that has the same active ingredient in the same strengths and dosage form as the listed drug and has been shown through bioequivalence testing to be therapeutically equivalent to the listed drug. Other than the requirement for bioequivalence testing, ANDA applicants are not required to conduct, or submit results of, preclinical or clinical tests to prove the safety or efficacy of their drug product. Drugs approved in this way are commonly referred to as “generic equivalents” to the listed drug, and can often be substituted by pharmacists under prescriptions written for the original listed drug.

The ANDA applicant is required to make certain certifications to FDA concerning any patents listed for the approved product in FDA’s Orange Book. Specifically, the applicant must certify that: (i) the required patent information has not been filed; (ii) the listed patent has expired; (iii) the listed patent has not expired but will expire on a particular date and approval is sought after patent expiration; or (iv) the listed patent is invalid or will not be infringed by the new product. The ANDA applicant may also elect to submit a section viii statement certifying that its proposed ANDA label does not contain (or carves out) any language regarding the patented method-of-use rather than make certifications concerning a listed method-of-use patent. If the applicant does not challenge the listed patents, the ANDA application will not be approved until all the listed patents claiming the referenced product have expired.

A certification that the new product will not infringe the already approved product’s listed patents, or that such patents are invalid, is called a Paragraph IV certification. If the ANDA applicant has provided a Paragraph IV certification to FDA, the applicant must also send notice of the Paragraph IV certification to the NDA and patent holders once the ANDA has been accepted for filing by FDA. The NDA and patent holders may then initiate a patent infringement lawsuit in response to the notice of the Paragraph IV certification. The filing of a patent infringement lawsuit within 45 days of the receipt of a Paragraph IV certification automatically prevents FDA from approving the ANDA until the earlier of 30 months, expiration of the patent, settlement of the lawsuit, or a decision in the infringement case that is favorable to the ANDA applicant. The ANDA application also will not be approved until any applicable non-patent exclusivity listed in the Orange Book for the referenced product has expired.

Disclosure of Clinical Study Information

Sponsors of clinical studies of FDA-regulated products, including drugs, are required to register and disclose certain clinical study information. Information related to the product, patient population, phase of investigation, clinical study sites and investigators, and other aspects of the clinical study is then made public as part of the registration. Sponsors are also obligated to post certain information regarding the results of their clinical studies after completion. Disclosure of the results of these studies can be delayed until the new product or new indication being studied has been approved. Competitors may use this publicly available information to gain knowledge regarding the progress of development programs.

Other Regulatory Requirements

We may be subject to federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations, including the Environmental Protection Act and the Clean Air Act. Although we believe that our safety procedures for handling and disposing of controlled materials comply with the standards prescribed by state and federal regulations, accidental contamination or injury from these materials may occur. In the event of such an occurrence, we could be held liable for any damages that result and any such liability could exceed our resources.

We may also be subject to regulations under other federal, state, and local laws, including the Occupational Safety and Health Act, national restrictions on technology transfer, and import, export, and customs regulations. It is possible that any portion of the regulatory framework under which we operate may change and that such change could have a negative impact on our current and anticipated operations. Failure to comply with these requirements could result, among other things, in suspension of regulatory approval, recalls, injunctions or civil or criminal sanctions.

Third-Party Payor Coverage and Reimbursement

The commercial success of our product candidates, if approved, will depend, in part, upon the availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors at the federal, state and private levels. Third-party payors include governmental programs such as Medicare or Medicaid, private insurance plans and managed care plans. These third-party payors may deny coverage or reimbursement for our product candidates in whole or in part if they determine that our product candidates are not medically appropriate or necessary. Also, third-party payors attempt to control costs by limiting coverage through the use of formularies and other cost-containment mechanisms and the amount of reimbursement for particular procedures or drug treatments.

Some third-party payors also require pre-approval of coverage for new or innovative devices or drug therapies before they will reimburse healthcare providers who use such therapies. While we cannot predict whether any proposed cost-containment measures will be adopted or otherwise implemented in the future these requirements or any announcement or adoption of such proposals could have a material adverse effect on our ability to obtain adequate prices for our approved product candidates to operate profitably.

Human Capital

Our approach to human capital resource management starts with our mission to detect and treat neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer’s disease. Our industry exists in a complex regulatory environment. The unique demands of our industry, together with the challenges of running an enterprise focused on the discovery, development, manufacture and commercialization of innovative medicines, require talent that is highly educated and/or has significant industry experience. Additionally, for certain key functions, we require specific scientific expertise to oversee and conduct research and development activities and the complex manufacturing requirements for biopharmaceutical products.

Our employees are an essential asset, and we consider our ability to recruit, train, retain and motivate our employees to be critical to our success. We are an equal opportunity employer, and we are fundamentally committed to creating and maintaining a work environment in which employees are treated with respect and dignity. All human resources policies, practices and actions related to hiring, promotion, compensation, benefits and termination are administered in accordance with the principal of equal employment opportunity, meaning that they are made on the basis of individual skills, knowledge, abilities, job performance and other legitimate criteria and without regard to race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender expression or identity, ethnicity, national origin, ancestry, age, mental or physical disability, genetic information, any veteran status, any military status or application for military service, or membership in any other category protected under applicable law. By focusing on employee retention and engagement, we also improve our ability to support our clinical trials, our pipeline, business and operations, and also protect the long-term interests of our stockholders. Our success also depends on our ability to attract, engage and retain a diverse group of employees.

Our base pay program aims to compensate management and staff members relative to the value of the contributions of their role, which takes into account the skills, knowledge and abilities required to perform each position, as well as the experience brought to the job. We also provide cash incentive programs to reward our management team and staff members in alignment with achievement of Company-wide goals that are designed to drive aspects of our strategic priorities that support and advance our strategy across our Company. Our management team and staff members are eligible for the grant of equity awards under our long-term incentive program that are designed to align their long-term interests with that of our stockholders.

Our benefit programs are generally broad-based, promote health and overall well-being and emphasize saving for retirement. All management team and regular staff members are eligible to participate in the same core health and welfare and retirement savings plans. Other employee benefits may include medical plans, dental plans, vacation and sick-pay plans, flexible spending accounts, life and accident insurance and short and long-term disability benefits.

Our Compensation Committee provides oversight of our executive compensation plans, policies and programs.

As of December 31, 2023, we had 29 full-time employees. None of our employees is represented by a labor union or covered under a collective bargaining agreement. We also engage numerous consultants to perform services on retainer, per diem or an hourly basis. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good.

Lawsuit Against Perpetrators of“Short and Distort”** Campaign**

On November 3, 2022, we announced that we had filed a lawsuit in federal court against certain individuals who executed a “short and distort” campaign against Cassava Sciences. The 150+ page complaint alleges that the defendants’ disinformation campaign caused a precipitous decline in Cassava Sciences’ stock price, a multi-billion dollar decline in its market capitalization, and delayed the Company’s work in developing a treatment for Alzheimer’s disease. The complaint identifies over 1,000 false and defamatory statements made by the defendants in submissions to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration as well as “reports” and presentations that defendants published online or on social media. Between January 3 and 23, 2024, the Magistrate Judge assigned to the case recommended that the District Court grant defendants’ various motions to dismiss the complaint. The Company has timely filed objections to those recommendations with the District Court. The matter is pending in federal district court for the Southern District of New York.

Internal Investigation

Beginning in August 2021, certain individuals, later revealed to be short sellers of the Company’s securities, publicly alleged that the Company and certain of its employees and third-party collaborators had engaged in research misconduct in connection with the development of simufilam. These allegations related in part to research that was conducted at the City University of New York (“CUNY”) pursuant to research contracts with the Company.

The Company takes allegations of research misconduct seriously. Accordingly, the Company’s Board of Directors engaged the law firm Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP to investigate these allegations. The investigation had access to Company personnel, communications, documents, data, and information, and counsel was assisted by technical experts with relevant experience and knowledge. The investigation has found no evidence to substantiate allegations that the Company or its employees engaged in or were aware of research misconduct.

Publication Corrections

An erratum or corrigendum is a correction of a published text, generally a human, production or author's error, that was not caught in proofing. Such errors generally do not impact data conclusions. We note the following corrections in our published works.

In July 2021, we presented clinical data for SavaDx in a poster presentation titled, “SavaDx, a Novel Plasma Biomarker to Detect Alzheimer’s Disease, Confirms Mechanism of Action of Simufilam” at the Alzheimer’s Association International Conference (AAIC) in Denver, CO and virtually. Publication correction: The AAIC data and data analysis are correct, however, visual errors that were not caught in proofing were disclosed by the Company in September 2021. This error does not impact data conclusions.

In 2017, we published in Neurobiology of Aging an article titled “PTI-125 binds and reverses an altered conformation of filamin A to reduce Alzheimer’s disease pathogenesis” (Vol 55, July 2017, Pages 99–114). Publication correction: Figure 12 contains an image showing 12 control bands. It should show 13. The data analysis was based on all 13 control bands. Other human errors in this publication have been noted and corrected. These errors do not impact data conclusions.

In 2012, we published in the Journal of Neuroscience an article titled*,“Reducing Amyloid-Related Alzheimer's Disease Pathogenesis by a Small Molecule Targeting Filamin A” (JNeurosci 2012;32:9773-9784).*Publication correction: A duplicated panel appears in Figure 8B of the article. This error does not impact data conclusions and the publisher printed a correction.

Corporate Information

We were incorporated as a Delaware corporation in May 1998 under the name Pain Therapeutics, Inc. In March 2019, we changed our company name to Cassava Sciences, Inc. Our principal offices are located at 6801 N. Capital of Texas Highway, Building 1; Suite 300, Austin, TX, 78731. Our telephone number is 512-501-2444. Our website address is www.CassavaSciences.com. Information contained on our website is not a part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and the inclusion of our website address in this Annual Report on Form 10-K is an inactive textual reference only.

We use Cassava Sciences, the Cassava Sciences logo, artwork and other marks as trademarks in the United States and other countries. Solely for convenience, trademarks and trade names referred to in this Annual Report, including logos, artwork, and other visual displays, may appear without the ® or TM symbols, but such references are not intended to indicate in any way that we will not assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, our rights, or the rights of the applicable licensor to these trademarks and trade names. We do not intend our use or display of other entities’ trade names, trademarks, or service marks to imply a relationship with, or endorsement or sponsorship of us by, any other entity.

We file electronically with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). The SEC maintains an Internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC. The address of the site ishttp://www.sec.gov.

You may obtain a free copy of our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports on the day of filing with the SEC on our website athttp://www.cassavasciences.com, by contacting our corporate offices by calling 512-501-2450 or by sending an e-mail message to IR@cassavasciences.com.