PROTHENA CORP PUBLIC LTD CO

Previous wording

We may not generate the cash that is necessary to finance our operations in the foreseeable future. We incurred net income of $14.1 million for the six months ended June 30, 2026, and net losses of $244.1 million and $122.3 million, and $147.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024, and 2023, respectively. As of June 30, 2026, we had an accumulated deficit of $1.3 billion. We expect to continue to incur substantial losses for the foreseeable future as we:

Current wording

We may not generate the cash that is necessary to finance our operations in the foreseeable future. We incurred netloss of$2.4 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2026, and net losses of $244.1 million and $122.3 million, and $147.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2025, 2024, and 2023, respectively. As of September 30, 2026, we had an accumulated deficit of$1.3 billion. We expect to continue to incur substantial losses for the foreseeable future as we:

Previous wording

As of June 30, 2026, we had cash and cash equivalents of $288.2 million. The majority of such cash is held in accounts at U.S. banking institutions that we believe are of high quality. Cash held in depository accounts may exceed the $250,000 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insurance limits. If such banking institutions were to fail, we could lose all or a portion of those amounts held in excess of such insurance limitations. Alth ough we believe, based on our current business plans, that our existing cash and cash equivalents will be sufficient to meet our obligations for at least the next twelve months, we anticipate that we will require additional capital in order to continue the research and development, and eventual commercialization, of our drug candidates. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors that are currently unknown to us, including, without limitation:

Current wording

As of September 30, 2026, we had cash and cash equivalents of$271.4 million. The majority of such cash is held in accounts at U.S. banking institutions that we believe are of high quality. Cash held in depository accounts may exceed the $250,000 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insurance limits. If such banking institutions were to fail, we could lose all or a portion of those amounts held in excess of such insurance limitations. Alth ough we believe, based on our current business plans, that our existing cash and cash equivalents will be sufficient to meet our obligations for at least the next twelve months, we anticipate that we will require additional capital in order to continue the research and development, and eventual commercialization, of our drug candidates. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors that are currently unknown to us, including, without limitation:

Previous wording

•the timing of progress, results, and costs of our clinical trials, including the Phase 3 clinical trial for prasinezumab being conducted by Roche, the Phase 3 clinical trial forcoramitug (formerly PRX004) being conducted by Novo

Current wording

•the timing of progress, results, and costs of our clinical trials, including the Phase 3 clinical trial for prasinezumab being conducted by Roche, the Phase 3 clinical trial forcoramitug (formerly PRX004) being conducted by Novo Nordisk, and the Phase 2 clinical trial for moponetug (formerly BMS-986446/PRX005) being conducted by BMS;

Previous wording

•As we have seen with the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, outbreaks of epidemic, pandemic, or contagious disease or other public health emergencies have historically and may in the future disrupt our operations, including clinical trials, research and nonclinical studies, the manufacture or shipment of both drug substance and finished drug product for drug candidates for preclinical testing and clinical trials, and access to stable credit and financial markets in the United States and worldwide. For example, the Phase 3 clinical trial for birtamimab and the Phase 2 clinical trial for prasinezumab conducted by Roche were disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic as a result of (i) the inability or unwillingness of study participants, site investigators or other study personnel to travel to clinical trial sites or otherwise follow study protocols and (ii) the diversion of healthcare resources away from the conduct of clinical trials.

Current wording

•As we have seen with the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, outbreaks of epidemic, pandemic, or contagious disease or other public health emergencies have historically and may in the future disrupt our operations, including clinical trials, research and nonclinical studies, the manufacture or shipment of both drug substance and finished drug product for drug candidates for preclinical testing and clinical trials, and access to stable credit and financial markets in the United States and worldwide. For example, the Phase 2 clinical trial for prasinezumab conducted by Roche was disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic as a result of (i) the inability or unwillingness of study participants, site investigators or other study personnel to travel to clinical trial sites or otherwise follow study protocols and (ii) the diversion of healthcare resources away from the conduct of clinical trials.

Previous wording

There is no assurance that the results of the Phase 3 clinical trial for prasinezumab, the Phase 3 clinical trial forcoramitug, the Phase 2 clinical trial for moponetug, and the Phase 1 clinical trial for PRX019 will support further development of these drug candidates. In addition, we currently do not, and may never, have any other drug candidates in clinical trials, and we have not identified drug candidates for many of our research programs.

Current wording

There is no assurance that the results of the Phase 3 clinical trial for prasinezumab, the Phase 3 clinical trial forcoramitug, and the Phase 2 clinical trial for moponetug will support further development of these drug candidates. In addition, we currently do not, and may never, have any other drug candidates in clinical trials, and we have not identified drug candidates for many of our research programs.

Previous wording

We cannot predict whether we, or our partners (as applicable), will encounter problems with the Phase 3 clinical trial for prasinezumab, the Phase 3 clinical trial forcoramitug, the Phase 2 clinical trial for moponetug, the Phase 1 clinical trial for PRX019, or any other future clinical trials that will cause us or any regulatory authority to delay, suspend or terminate those clinical trials or delay the analysis of data derived from them. A number of events, including any of the following, could delay the completion of our ongoing or planned clinical trials and negatively impact our ability to obtain regulatory approval for, and to market and sell, a particular drug candidate:

Current wording

We cannot predict whether we, or our partners (as applicable), will encounter problems with the Phase 3 clinical trial for prasinezumab, the Phase 3 clinical trial forcoramitug, the Phase 2 clinical trial for moponetug, or any other future clinical trials that will cause us or any regulatory authority to delay, suspend or terminate those clinical trials or delay the analysis of data derived from them. A number of events, including any of the following, could delay the completion of our ongoing or planned clinical trials and negatively impact our ability to obtain regulatory approval for, and to market and sell, a particular drug candidate:

Previous wording

As is the case with other biopharmaceutical companies, our success is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the biopharmaceutical industry involves both technological and legal complexity and is costly, time-consuming, and inherently uncertain. Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States could increase the uncertainties and costs, and may diminish our ability to protect our inventions, obtain, maintain, and enforce our intellectual property rights and, more generally, could affect the value of our intellectual property or narrow the scope of our owned and licensed patents. Recent patent reform legislation in the United States and other countries, including the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the Leahy-Smith Act, signed into law on September 16, 2011, could increase those uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted, redefine prior art and provide more efficient and cost-effective avenues for competitors to challenge the validity of patents. These include allowing third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent by USPTO administered post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review, and derivation proceedings. After March 2013, under the Leahy-Smith Act, the United States transitioned to a first inventor to file system in which, assuming that the other statutory requirements are met, the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether a third party was the first to invent the claimed invention. A third party that files a patent application in the USPTO after March 2013, but before we file an application covering the same invention, could therefore be awarded a patent covering an invention of ours even if we had made the invention before it was made by such third party. This will require us to be cognizant going forward of the time from invention to filing of a patent application. Since patent applications in the United States and most other countries are confidential for a period of time after filing or until issuance, we cannot be certain that we or our licensors were the first to either (i) file any patent application related to our drug candidates and other proprietary technologies we may develop or (ii) invent any of the inventions claimed in our or our licensor’s patents or patent applications. Even where we have a valid and enforceable patent, we may not be able to exclude others from practicing the claimed invention where the other party can show that they used the invention in commerce before our filing date o…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Current wording

States and other countries, including the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the Leahy-Smith Act, signed into law on September 16, 2011, could increase those uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted, redefine prior art and provide more efficient and cost-effective avenues for competitors to challenge the validity of patents. These include allowing third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent by USPTO administered post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review, and derivation proceedings. After March 2013, under the Leahy-Smith Act, the United States transitioned to a first inventor to file system in which, assuming that the other statutory requirements are met, the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether a third party was the first to invent the claimed invention. A third party that files a patent application in the USPTO after March 2013, but before we file an application covering the same invention, could therefore be awarded a patent covering an invention of ours even if we had made the invention before it was made by such third party. This will require us to be cognizant going forward of the time from invention to filing of a patent application. Since patent applications in the United States and most other countries are confidential for a period of time after filing or until issuance, we cannot be certain that we or our licensors were the first to either (i) file any patent application related to our drug candidates and other proprietary technologies we may develop or (ii) invent any of the inventions claimed in our or our licensor’s patents or patent applications. Even where we have a valid and enforceable patent, we may not be able to exclude others from practicing the claimed invention where the other party can show that they used the invention in commerce before our filing date or the other party benefits from a compulsory license. However, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and/or growth prospects.

Previous wording

Patents are of national or regional effect, and filing, prosecuting, maintaining, and defending patents on drug candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States can have a different scope and strength than do those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not currently, or may not in the future, protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement rights are not as strong as those in the

Current wording

Patents are of national or regional effect, and filing, prosecuting, maintaining, and defending patents on drug candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States can have a different scope and strength than do those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not currently, or may not in the future, protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement rights are not as strong as those in the United States. These products may compete with our products and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or adequate to prevent them from competing.

Previous wording

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

Current wording

We are generally also subject to all of the same risks with respect to protection of intellectual property that we license as we are for intellectual property that we own, which are described below. If we or our licensors fail to adequately protect this intellectual property, our ability to commercialize our products could suffer.

Previous wording

As with any publicly traded company, your percentage ownership in us may be diluted in the future because of equity issuances for acquisitions, capital raising transactions, or otherwise. We may need to raise additional capital in the future. If we are able to raise additional capital, we may issue equity or convertible debt instruments, which may severely dilute your ownership interest in us. In addition, we intend to continue to grant option awards to our directors, officers and employees, which would dilute your ownership stake in us. As of June 30, 2026, the number of ordinary shares available for issuance pursuant to outstanding and future equity awards under our equity planswas 16,381,847.

Current wording

As with any publicly traded company, your percentage ownership in us may be diluted in the future because of equity issuances for acquisitions, capital raising transactions, or otherwise. We may need to raise additional capital in the future. If we are able to raise additional capital, we may issue equity or convertible debt instruments, which may severely dilute your ownership interest in us. In addition, we intend to continue to grant option awards to our directors, officers and employees, which would dilute your ownership stake in us. As of September 30, 2026, the number of ordinary shares available for issuance pursuant to outstanding and future equity awards under our equity planswas 16,393,435.