CRESCENT BIOPHARMA, INC.

Investing in our ordinary shares involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the following risks and uncertainties, together with all of the other information contained in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q before making an investment decision. The occurrence of any of the following risks could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, reputation, or results of operations. In such case, the trading price of shares of our ordinary shares could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment. It is not possible to predict or identify all such risks; our operations could also be affected by factors, events, or uncertainties that are not presently known to us or that we currently do not consider presenting significant risks to our operations. Moreover, some of the factors, events, and contingencies discussed below may have occurred in the past, but the disclosures below are not representations as to whether or not the factors, events, or contingencies have occurred in the past, and instead reflect our beliefs and opinions as to the factors, events, or contingencies that could materially and adversely affect us in the future. Therefore, you should not consider the following risks to be a complete statement of all the potential risks or uncertainties that we face.

We are a preclinical-stage biotechnology company with a limited operating history on which to assess our business; we have not completed any clinical trials, have no products approved for commercial sale, have historically incurred losses, and we anticipate that we will continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future. Moreover, we have never generated revenue from product sales and may never be profitable.

We are a preclinical-stage biotechnology company with a limited operating history. We will need to raise substantial additional capital to continue to fund our operations in the future. We have based our estimates on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and could exhaust our available financial resources sooner than we currently anticipate. We have devoted substantially all of our financial resources to identify, acquire, and develop our product candidates, organizing and staffing our company, and providing general and administrative support for our operations.

Developing our product candidates requires a substantial amount of capital. We expect our research and development expenses to continue to increase in connection with its ongoing activities, particularly as we advance our product candidates through preclinical studies and clinical trials. We will need to raise additional capital to fund our operations, and such funding may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all, and such funding may become even more difficult to obtain due to rising interest rates and the current downturn in the U.S. capital markets and the biotechnology sector in general. Competition for additional capital among biotechnology companies may be particularly intense during economic downturns. We may be unable to raise capital through public offerings of our ordinary shares and may need to turn to alternative financing arrangements. Such arrangements, if we pursue them, could involve the issuance of one or more types of securities, including ordinary shares, preferred shares, convertible debt, warrants to acquire ordinary shares, or other securities. These securities could be issued at or below the then prevailing market price for our ordinary shares. In addition, if we issue debt securities, the holders of the debt would have a claim to our assets that would be superior to the rights of shareholders until the principal, accrued and unpaid interest, and any premium or make-whole has been paid. Interest on any newly-issued debt securities and/or newly-incurred borrowings would increase our operating costs and reduce our net income (or increase our net loss), and these impacts may be material. If the issuance of new securities results in diminished rights to holders of our ordinary shares, the market price of our ordinary shares could be materially and adversely affected.

•seek strategic partnerships, or amend existing partnerships, for research and development programs at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable or that we otherwise would have sought to develop independently, or on terms that are less favorable than might otherwise be available in the future;

•pursue the sale of the company to a third party at a price that may result in a loss on investment for our shareholders; or

•file for bankruptcy or cease operations altogether (and face any related legal proceedings).

Even if successful in raising new capital, we could be limited in the amount of capital we raise due to investor demand restrictions placed on the amount of capital we raise or other reasons.

Additionally, any capital raising efforts are subject to significant risks and contingencies, as described in more detail under the risk factor titled “Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our shareholders, restrict our operations, or require us to relinquish rights.”

We have no products approved for commercialization and have never generated any revenue from product sales. Our ability to generate revenue and achieve profitability depends on our ability, alone or with strategic collaborators, to successfully complete the development of, and obtain the regulatory and marketing approvals necessary to commercialize, one or more of our product candidates. We do not anticipate generating revenue from product sales for the foreseeable future. Our ability to generate future revenue from product sales depends heavily on our success in many areas, including but not limited to:

•completing research and development of our product candidates;

•obtaining regulatory and marketing approvals for our product candidates for which we complete clinical trials;

•manufacturing product candidates and establishing and maintaining supply and manufacturing relationships with third parties that are commercially feasible, meet regulatory requirements and our supply needs in sufficient quantities to meet market demand for our product candidates, if approved;

•qualifying for adequate coverage and reimbursement by government and third-party payors for any product candidates for which we obtain regulatory and marketing approval;

•marketing, launching, and commercializing product candidates for which we obtain regulatory and marketing approval, either directly or with a collaborator or distributor;

•gaining market acceptance of our product candidates as treatment options;

•addressing any competing products and technological and market developments;

•implementing internal systems and infrastructure, as needed;

•protecting and enforcing our intellectual property rights, including patents, trade secrets, and know-how;

•obtaining coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors and maintaining pricing for our product candidates that supports profitability; and

•attracting, hiring, and retaining qualified personnel.

Even if one or more of the product candidates that we develop is approved for commercial sale, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercializing any approved product candidate. Our expenses could increase beyond expectations if we are required by regulatory authorities to perform clinical and other studies in addition to those that we anticipate. Even if we are able to generate revenues from the sale of any approved products, we may not become profitable and may need to obtain additional funding to continue operations. We will also have to develop or acquire manufacturing capabilities or continue to contract with contract manufacturers in order to continue development and potential commercialization of our product candidates. For instance, if the costs of manufacturing our drug product are not commercially feasible, we will need to develop or procure our drug product in a commercially feasible manner in order to successfully commercialize a future approved product, if any. Additionally, if we are not able to generate revenue from the sale of any approved products, we may never become profitable.

We are a preclinical-stage biotechnology company with a limited operating history on which to assess our business; we have not initiated, conducted, or completed any clinical trials, have no products approved for commercial sale, have historically incurred losses, and anticipates that we will continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future.

We are a preclinical-stage biotechnology company with a limited operating history. Since September 19, 2024 (inception), we have incurred significant operating losses. For the nine months ended September 30, 2025, we reported a net loss of $61.5 million and had an accumulated deficit of $79.4 million. We will need to raise substantial additional capital to continue to fund our operations in the future. Failure to raise capital as and when needed, on favorable terms or at all, would have a negative impact on our financial condition and our ability to develop our product candidates. Changing circumstances may cause us to consume capital significantly faster or slower than we currently anticipate. If we are unable to acquire additional capital or resources, we will be required to modify our operational plans to complete future milestones and we may be required to delay, limit, reduce, or eliminate development or future commercialization efforts of product candidates and/or programs. We have based these estimates on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could exhaust our available financial resources sooner than we currently anticipate. We may be forced to reduce our operating expenses and raise additional funds to meet our working capital needs, principally through the additional sales of our securities or debt financings or entering into strategic collaborations.

We have devoted substantially all of our financial resources to identify, acquire, and develop our product candidates, organizing and staffing our company, and providing general and administrative support for our operations. To date, we have funded our operations primarily from the sale and issuance of convertible preferred and common equity securities and unsecured convertible notes. The amount of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of our future expenditures and our ability to obtain funding through equity or debt financings, strategic collaborations, or grants.

Biopharmaceutical product development is a highly speculative undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. We expect our losses to increase as our product candidates enter more advanced clinical trials. It may be several years, if ever, before we complete pivotal clinical trials and/or have a product candidate approved for commercialization. We expect to invest significant funds into the research and development of our current programs to determine the potential to advance product candidates to regulatory approval. If we obtain regulatory approval to market a product candidate, our future revenue will depend upon the size of any markets in which our product candidates may receive approval, and our ability to achieve sufficient market acceptance, pricing, coverage, and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors, and adequate market share for our product candidates in those markets. Even if we obtain adequate market share for our product candidates, because the potential markets in which our product candidates may ultimately receive regulatory approval could be very small, we may never become profitable despite obtaining such market share and acceptance of our products.

•continue the preclinical development and initiate the clinical development of our product candidates;

•advance our product candidates into larger, more expensive clinical trials;

•establish a sales, marketing, and distribution infrastructure to commercialize any products for which we may obtain regulatory and marketing approval and market for ourselves;

•seek to identify, assess, acquire, and/or develop other product candidates;

•make milestone, royalty, or other payments under third-party license agreements;

•are required to pay penalties under our Registration Rights Agreement for failing to timely register the applicable securities;

•seek to attract and retain skilled personnel;

•experience any delays or encounter issues with the development and potential regulatory approval of our clinical and product candidates such as safety issues, manufacturing delays, clinical trial accrual delays, longer follow-up for planned studies or trials, additional major studies or trials, or supportive trials necessary to support regulatory and marketing approval; and

•incur additional costs associated with operating as a public company.

We have no significant experience as a company in initiating, conducting, or completing clinical trials. In part because of this lack of experience, we cannot be certain that our planned clinical trials will begin or be completed on time, if at all. In addition, we have not yet demonstrated an ability to obtain regulatory and marketing approvals, manufacture a commercial-scale product or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales, marketing, and distribution activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Consequently, any predictions you make about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a longer operating history. Further, the net losses we incur may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year, such that a period-to-period comparison of our results of operations may not be a good indication of our future performance.

Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our shareholders, restrict our operations, or require us to relinquish rights.

Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial revenue from the sale of our product candidates, we expect to finance our cash needs through a combination of equity offerings, debt financings, and license and development agreements. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity securities or convertible debt securities, the ownership interest of our shareholders will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect the rights of holders of our ordinary shares. Debt financing and preferred equity financing, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures, or declaring dividends.

To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity, including pursuant to any sales under convertible debt or other securities convertible into equity, the ownership interest of our shareholders will be diluted, and the terms of these new securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect the rights of our shareholders. For instance, immediately prior to the consummation of the Merger, certain institutional and accredited investors purchased shares of Pre-Merger Crescent common stock and pre-funded warrants for an aggregate purchase price of $200.0 million (which includes $37.5 million of gross proceeds we previously received from the issuance of the Convertible Notes in October 2024).

Debt financing, if available, would likely involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures, making additional product acquisitions, or declaring dividends. If we raise additional funds through strategic collaborations or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our product candidates or future revenue streams or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us. We cannot assure that we will be able to obtain additional funding if and when necessary to fund our entire portfolio of product candidates to meet our projected plans. If we are unable to obtain funding on a timely basis, we may be required to delay or discontinue one or more of our development programs or the commercialization of any product candidates or be unable to expand our operations or otherwise capitalize on potential business opportunities, which could materially harm our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Risks Related to Discovery, Development, and Commercialization

We face competition from entities that have developed or may develop programs for the diseases addressed by product candidates developed by us.

The development and commercialization of drugs is highly competitive. Product candidates developed by us, if approved, will face significant competition and our failure to effectively compete may prevent us from achieving significant market penetration. We compete with a variety of multinational biopharmaceutical companies, specialized biotechnology companies and emerging biotechnology companies, including Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Genentech, AstraZeneca, Summit Therapeutics Inc., BioNTech SE, LaNova Medicines Ltd., and Compass Therapeutics, Inc., as well as academic institutions, governmental agencies, and public and private research institutions, among others. Many of the companies with which we are currently competing or will compete against in the future have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals, and marketing regulatory approved products than we do, and are further along in the clinical development and/or commercialization process than we are. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel, establishing clinical trial sites, raising capital, registering patients for clinical trials, establishing and defending rights to intellectual property, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our product candidates.

Our competitors have developed, are developing, or may in the future develop programs and processes competitive with our programs and processes. Competitive therapeutic treatments include those that have already been approved and accepted by the medical community and any potential new treatments, including those currently under clinical development. Our success will depend partially on our ability to develop and commercialize products that have a competitive safety, efficacy, dosing, and/or presentation profile. Our commercial opportunity and success will be reduced or eliminated if competing products are safer, more effective, have a more attractive dosing profile or presentation or are less expensive than the products we develop, or if our competitors develop competing products or if biosimilars enter the market more quickly than we do and are able to gain market acceptance. Conversely, the lack of commercial success of other competing programs may raise concerns about the financial viability of our programs.

Our programs are in preclinical stages of development and may fail in development or suffer delays that materially and adversely affect their commercial viability. If we or our current or future collaborators are unable to our development of or commercialize our product candidates, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.

We have no products on the market, and all of our programs are in preclinical stages of development and have not been tested in humans. As a result, we expect it will be many years before we commercialize any product candidate, if ever. Our ability to achieve and sustain profitability depends on obtaining regulatory approvals for, and successfully commercializing, our product candidates, either alone or with third parties, and we cannot guarantee you that we will ever obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates. We have not yet demonstrated our ability to initiate or complete any clinical trials, obtain regulatory approvals, manufacture a clinical or commercial scale product or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Before obtaining regulatory approval for the commercial distribution of our product candidates, we or an existing or future collaborator must conduct extensive preclinical tests and clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity, potency, and efficacy in humans of our programs and product candidates.

We or our collaborators may experience delays in initiating or completing clinical trials. We or our collaborators also may experience numerous unforeseen events during, or as a result of, any clinical trials that they could conduct that could delay or prevent our ability to receive regulatory and marketing approval or commercialize our product candidates, including:

•we may elect to, or regulators, IRBs, or ethics committees may require that we or our investigators, suspend or terminate clinical research or trials for various reasons, including noncompliance with regulatory requirements or a finding that the patients in our trials are being exposed to unacceptable health risks;

•the cost of clinical trials of any of our programs may be greater than we anticipate;

•reports from clinical testing of other therapies may raise safety or efficacy concerns about our programs;

Commencing clinical trials in the United States is subject to acceptance by the FDA of an IND application, or acceptance or approval of a similar application by foreign regulatory authorities, and finalizing the trial design based on any feedback received from the FDA or such other regulatory authorities. In the event that the FDA or a foreign regulatory authority requires us to complete additional preclinical studies or we are required to satisfy other FDA or foreign regulatory authority requests, respectively, prior to commencing clinical trials, the start of our clinical trials may be delayed. Even if we receive and incorporate guidance from any regulatory authorities, the FDA or such other regulatory authorities could disagree that we have satisfied their requirements to commence any clinical trial or change their position on the acceptability of our trial design or the clinical endpoints selected, which may require us to complete additional preclinical studies or clinical trials, delay the enrollment of our clinical trials, or impose stricter approval conditions than we currently expect. There are equivalent processes and risks applicable to clinical trial applications in other countries, including countries in the European Union (“EU”).

We may not have the financial resources to continue development of, or to modify existing or enter into new collaborations for, a product candidate if we experience any issues that delay or prevent regulatory approval of, or our ability to commercialize, our product candidates. We or our current or future collaborators’ inability to complete development of, or commercialize our product candidates, or significant delays in doing so, could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We are substantially dependent on the success of our lead program, CR-001, and our anticipated clinical trials of such program may not be successful.

Our future success is substantially dependent on our ability to timely obtain regulatory and marketing approval for, and then successfully commercialize, our lead program, CR-001. We also intend to advance our CR-002 and CR-003 programs. We are investing a majority of our efforts and financial resources into the research and development of these programs. We believe the success of CR-001 is dependent on observing in CR-001 the targeting, binding, cooperativity and pharmacokinetics of ivonescimab, an anti-PD-1/anti-VEGF bispecific antibody that demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival (“PFS”) to market-leading pembrolizumab in a large third-party Phase 3 clinical trial, while avoiding the mechanistic risks that could perturb the balance of efficacy and safety that define this new class of immunotherapy, assuming we successfully complete clinical development and obtain marketing approval for CR-001. To the extent we do not observe this recapitulation of ivonescimab in CR-001, it would significantly and adversely affect the clinical and commercial potential of CR-001.

Our programs will require additional clinical development, evaluation of clinical, preclinical, and manufacturing activities, product development, regulatory and marketing approval in multiple jurisdictions, substantial investment, and significant marketing efforts before we generate any revenues from product sales. We are not permitted to market or promote these programs, or any other programs, before we receive regulatory and marketing approval from the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities, and we may never receive such regulatory or marketing approvals.

The success of our product candidates will depend on a variety of factors. We do not have complete control over many of these factors, including certain aspects of clinical development and the regulatory submission process, potential threats to our intellectual property rights, and the manufacturing, marketing, distribution, and sales efforts of any current or future collaborator. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that we will ever be able to generate revenue through the sale of these product candidates, even if approved. If we are not successful in obtaining regulatory approval and commercializing our CR-001, CR-002, or CR-003 programs, or is significantly delayed in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.

If we do not achieve our projected development goals in the time frames we announce and expect, the commercialization of our product candidates may be delayed and our expenses may increase and, as a result, our share price may decline.

From time to time, we estimate the timing of the anticipated accomplishment of various scientific, clinical, regulatory, and other product development goals, which we sometimes refers to as milestones. These milestones may include the commencement or completion of scientific studies and clinical trials, such as the expected timing for the anticipated commencement of our Phase 1 studies, and clinical trials in solid tumor and other target indications, as well as the receipt of clinical data, and submission of regulatory filings. From time to time, we may publicly announce the expected timing of some of these milestones. All of these milestones are and will be based on numerous assumptions. The actual timing of these milestones can vary dramatically compared to our estimates, in some cases for reasons beyond our control. If we do not meet these milestones as publicly announced, or at all, the commercialization of our product candidates may be delayed or never achieved and, as a result, our share price may decline. Additionally, delays relative to our projected timelines are likely to cause overall expenses to increase, which may require us to raise additional capital sooner than expected and prior to achieving targeted development milestones.

Any drug delivery device that we potentially use to deliver our product candidates may have its own regulatory, development, supply and other risks.

We expect to deliver our product candidates via a drug delivery device, such as an injector or other delivery system. There may be unforeseen technical complications related to the development activities required to bring such a product to market, including primary container compatibility and/or dose volume requirements. Our product candidates may not be approved or may be substantially delayed in receiving approval if the devices that we choose to develop do not gain and/or maintain their own regulatory approvals or clearances. Where approval of the drug product and device is sought under a single application, the increased complexity of the review process may delay approval. For example, the FDA’s review of a marketing application for our product candidates may include the participation of both the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research and the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Although the FDA and comparable foreign agencies have or may have systems in place for the review and approval of combination products, we may experience additional delays in the development and commercialization of such product candidates due to regulatory timing constraints and uncertainties in the product development and approval process. Moreover, although we anticipate that the device component of any combination product candidates we develop will be reviewed within the usual time frames expected for the underlying biologic component application, and that no separate marketing application for the device components of such product candidates will be required in the United States, the FDA or comparable regulatory authorities may delay approval or require us to conduct additional studies with the device which may delay the approval of the combination product.

In addition, some drug delivery devices are provided by single-source unaffiliated third-party companies. We may be dependent on the sustained cooperation and effort of those third-party companies both to supply the devices and, in some cases, to conduct the studies required for approval or other regulatory clearance of the devices. Even if approval is obtained, we may also be dependent on those third-party companies continuing to maintain such approvals or clearances once they have been received. Failure of third-party companies to supply the devices, to successfully complete studies on the devices in a timely manner, or to obtain or maintain required approvals or clearances of the devices could result in increased development costs, delays in or failure to obtain regulatory approval, and delays in product candidates reaching the market or in gaining approval or clearance for expanded labels for new indications.

Our approach to the discovery and development of our programs is unproven, and we may not be successful in our efforts to build a pipeline of programs with commercial value.

Our approach to the discovery and development of our programs, particularly CR-001, leverages clinically validated mechanisms of action and incorporates the targeting, binding, cooperativity and pharmacokinetics of ivonescimab, an anti-PD-1/anti-VEGF bispecific antibody that demonstrated significantly improved PFS to market-leading pembrolizumab in HARMONi-2, a large Phase 3 clinical trial, sponsored by Akeso, for the treatment of naïve, or not previously treated, advanced and metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (“NSCLC”). Our programs are purposefully designed to avoid mechanistic risks that could perturb the balance of efficacy and safety that defines this new class of immunotherapy. However, the scientific research that forms the basis of our efforts to develop programs using ivonescimab-like technologies is ongoing and may not result in viable programs. There is limited clinical data available on product candidates utilizing the same mechanism of action as ivonescimab, especially in solid tumor indications, demonstrating whether they are safe or effective for long-term treatment in humans. The long-term safety and efficacy of these technologies and exposure profile of our programs compared to currently approved products is unknown. Additionally, there can be no assurance that our clinical trials, which are expected to cover a broader set of indications than in HARMONi-2, will demonstrate similar or comparable safety and efficacy results to HARMONi-2. We may ultimately discover that reproducing ivonescimab’s established pharmacology for its specific targets and indications and any programs resulting therefrom does not possess certain properties required for therapeutic effectiveness. We currently have only preclinical data regarding the ivonescimab-like properties of our programs and the same results may not be seen in humans. In addition, programs using ivonescimab-like technologies may demonstrate different chemical and pharmacological properties in patients than they do in laboratory studies. This technology and any programs resulting therefrom may not demonstrate the same chemical and pharmacological properties in humans and may interact with human biological systems in unforeseen, ineffective, or harmful ways. Many product candidates that appeared highly promising in preclinical studies or in early-stage clinical trials have failed when advanced into, or further in, clinical development. In addition, the failure of companies that are developing products similar to us or targeting the same indications as we are to demonstrate safety and efficacy of their product candidates may be harmful to our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

In addition, we may in the future seek to discover and develop programs that are based on novel targets and technologies that are unproven. If our discovery or business development activities fail to identify novel targets or technologies for drug development, or such targets prove to be unsuitable for treating human disease, we may not be able to develop viable additional programs. We and our existing or future collaborators may never receive approval to market and commercialize any product candidate. Even if we or an existing or future collaborator obtains regulatory approval, the approval may be for targets, disease indications, or patient populations that are not as broad as we intended or desired or may require labeling that includes significant use or distribution restrictions or safety warnings. If the products resulting from our programs prove to be ineffective, unsafe, or commercially unviable, such programs would have little, if any, value, which would have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Before obtaining regulatory and marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of any product candidate, we must complete preclinical studies and then conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity, potency, and efficacy of such product candidate in humans. Our clinical trials may not be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all, and failure can occur at any time during the preclinical study or clinical trial process. For example, we depend on the availability of non-human primates (“NHPs”) to conduct certain preclinical studies that we are required to complete prior to submitting an IND and initiating clinical development. There has remained a global shortage of NHPs available for drug development. This could cause the cost of obtaining NHPs for our future preclinical studies to increase significantly and, if the shortage continues, could also result in delays to our development timelines.

Furthermore, a failure of one or more clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing. The outcome of preclinical studies and early-stage clinical trials may not be predictive of the success of later clinical trials. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain regulatory and marketing approval of their product candidates. In addition, we expect to rely on patients to provide feedback on measures such as measures of quality of life, which are subjective and inherently difficult to evaluate. These measures can be influenced by factors outside of our control, and can vary widely from day-to-day for a particular patient, and from patient to patient and from site to site within a clinical trial.

We cannot be sure that the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities will agree with our clinical development plan. We plan to design a Phase 1 clinical trial for CR-001 based on the clinical profile of ivonescimab. If the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities require us to conduct additional trials or enroll additional patients, our development timelines may be delayed. We cannot be sure that submission of an IND or similar application will result in the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, as applicable, allowing clinical trials to begin in a timely manner, if at all. Moreover, even if these trials begin, issues may arise that could cause regulatory authorities to suspend or terminate such clinical trials. Events that may prevent successful or timely initiation or completion of clinical trials include: inability to generate sufficient preclinical, toxicology or otherin vivo orin vitro data to support the initiation or continuation of clinical trials; delays in reaching a consensus with regulatory authorities on study design or implementation of the clinical trials; delays or failure in obtaining regulatory authorization to commence a trial; delays in reaching agreement on acceptable terms with prospective CROs and clinical trial sites, the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different CROs and clinical trial sites; delays in identifying, recruiting, and training suitable clinical investigators; delays in obtaining required IRB approval or positive ethics committee opinions at each clinical trial site; delays in manufacturing, testing, releasing, validating, or importing/exporting sufficient stable quantities of our product candidates for use in clinical trials or the inability to do any of the foregoing; failure by our CROs, other third parties or us to adhere to clinical trial protocols; failure to perform in accordance with the FDA’s or any other regulatory authority’s current Good Clinical Practice requirements (“GCPs”) or applicable regulatory guidelines in other countries; changes to the clinical trial protocols; clinical sites deviating from trial protocol or dropping out of a trial; changes in regulatory requirements and guidance that require amending or submitting new clinical protocols; selection of clinical endpoints that require prolonged periods of observation or analyses of resulting data; transfer of manufacturing processes to facilities operated by a contract manufacturing organization (“CMO”) and delays or failure by our CMOs or us to make any necessary changes to such manufacturing process; and third parties being unwilling or unable to satisfy their contractual obligations to us.

We could also encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by it, by the IRBs or ethics committees of the institutions in which such clinical trials are being conducted, by the Data Safety Monitoring Board, if any, for such clinical trial or by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Such authorities may suspend or terminate a clinical trial due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical trial protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from the programs, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions, or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. If we are required to conduct additional clinical trials or other testing of our product candidates beyond those that we currently contemplate, if we are unable to successfully complete clinical trials of our product candidates, if the results of these trials are not positive or are only moderately positive, or if there are safety concerns, our business and results of operations may be adversely affected and we may incur significant additional costs.

We may experience difficulties in patient enrollment in our future clinical trials for a variety of reasons, including the competitive landscape for solid tumor indications and competition for establishing trial sites and clinical trial enrollment. The timely completion of clinical trials in accordance with their protocols depends, among other things, on our ability to enroll a sufficient number of patients who remain in the trial until its conclusion. The enrollment of patients in future trials for any of our programs will depend on many factors, including the size and nature of the targeted patient population, the severity of the disease or condition under investigation, the availability and efficacy of approved therapies for the disease or condition under investigation, patient eligibility criteria for the trial in question as defined in the protocol, perceived risks and benefits of the product candidate under study, clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages of the product candidate being studied in relation to other available and investigational therapies, efforts to facilitate timely enrollment in clinical trials, referral practices of physicians, the ability to monitor patients adequately during and after treatment, proximity and availability of clinical trial sites for prospective patients, the continued enrollment of prospective patients by clinical trial sites, and the risk that patients enrolled in clinical trials will drop out of such trials before completion.

Additionally, the number of patients required for clinical trials of our programs may be larger than we anticipate, especially if regulatory bodies require the completion of non-inferiority or superiority trials. Even if we are able to enroll a sufficient number of patients for our future clinical trials, we may have difficulty maintaining patients in our clinical trials. Our inability to enroll or maintain a sufficient number of patients would result in significant delays in completing clinical trials or receipt of regulatory and marketing approvals and increased development costs or may require us to abandon one or more clinical trials altogether.

From time to time, we may publicly disclose preliminary or topline data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials, which are based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following a more comprehensive review of the data. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations, and conclusions as part of our analyses of these data without the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate complete data. As a result, the preliminary or topline results that we report may differ from future results of the same studies, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated or subsequently made subject to audit and verification procedures. As a result, any preliminary or topline data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. From time to time, we may also disclose interim data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials. Interim data are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available or as patients from our clinical trials continue other treatments. Further, disclosure of such data by us could result in volatility in the price of our ordinary shares.

Further, others, including regulatory agencies, may not accept or agree with our assumptions, estimates, calculations, conclusions, or analyses or may interpret or weigh the importance of data differently, which could impact the value of the particular product candidate, the approvability or commercialization of the particular product candidate and us in general. In addition, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular preclinical study or clinical trial is based on what is typically extensive information, and you or others may not agree with what we determine is material or otherwise appropriate information to include in our disclosure. As a result, you or others may have reached different conclusions based on such extensive information in comparison to our publicly disclosed conclusion regarding a particular preclinical study or clinical trial. If the preliminary, topline, or interim data that we report differ from actual results, or if others, including regulatory authorities, disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain approval for, and commercialize, our product candidates may be harmed, which could harm our business, operating results, prospects, or financial condition.

Our future clinical trials or those of our future collaborators may reveal significant adverse events or undesirable side effects not seen in our preclinical studies and may result in a safety profile that could halt clinical development, inhibit regulatory approval or limit commercial potential or market acceptance of any of our product candidates.

Results of our clinical trials could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of side effects, adverse events, or unexpected characteristics. While we believe our preclinical studies conducted with respect to our programs have not shown any such characteristics to date, we have not yet initiated any clinical trials in humans. If significant adverse events or other side effects are observed in any of our future clinical trials, we may have difficulty recruiting patients to such trials, patients may drop out of the trials, or we may be required to abandon the trials or our development efforts of one or more programs altogether. For example, clinical experience in NSCLC with anti-VEGF inhibitors, such as bevacizumab, identified serious adverse events, including fatal pulmonary hemorrhage, that have limited the number of patients eligible for treatment. Other adverse events associated with bevacizumab include proteinuria and hypertension.

We, the FDA or other applicable regulatory authorities, or an IRB, may suspend any clinical trials of any program at any time for various reasons, including a belief that subjects or patients in such trials are being exposed to unacceptable health risks or adverse side effects. Some potential products developed in the biotechnology industry that initially showed therapeutic promise in early-stage studies and trials have later been found to cause side effects that prevented their further development. Other potential products have shown side effects in preclinical studies, which side effects do not present themselves in clinical trials in humans. Even if the side effects do not preclude the product candidate from obtaining or maintaining regulatory and marketing approval, undesirable side effects may inhibit market acceptance of the approved product due to its tolerability versus other therapies. Treatment-emergent adverse events could also affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled subjects to complete our clinical trials or could result in potential product liability claims. Potential side effects associated with our product candidates may not be appropriately recognized or managed by the treating medical staff, as toxicities resulting from our product candidates may not be normally encountered in the general patient population and by medical personnel. In addition, patients in our planned clinical trials may also be undergoing surgical, radiation or chemotherapy treatments, which can cause side effects or adverse events that are unrelated to our product candidate, but may still impact the success of our clinical trials. Any of these occurrences could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects significantly.

In addition, even if we successfully advance our product candidates or any future product candidates through clinical trials, such trials will only include a limited number of patients and limited duration of exposure to our product candidates. As a result, we cannot be assured that adverse effects of our product candidates will not be uncovered when a significantly larger number of patients are exposed to the product candidate after approval. Further, any clinical trials may not be sufficient to determine the effect and safety consequences of using our product candidates over a multi-year period.

If any of the foregoing events occur or if one or more of our programs proves to be unsafe, our entire pipeline could be affected, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Because we have limited financial and managerial resources, we focus our research and development efforts on certain selected programs and utilize Paragon Therapeutics, Inc. (“Paragon”) to conduct certain research activities (primarily preclinical studies) pursuant to the Antibody Discovery and Option Agreement, dated September 19, 2024 (the “the “Antibody Paragon Option Agreement”), and the Amended and Restated ADC Discovery and Option Agreement, dated April 28, 2025 (the “ADC Paragon Option Agreement” and together with the Antibody Paragon Option Agreement, the “Paragon Option Agreements”), each by and among Crescent, Paragon and Parascent Holding LLC. For example, we are initially focused on our lead program, CR-001, and other expected programs, CR-002 and CR-003, for which we have or expect to develop a research plan with Paragon and have or expect to obtain a license from Paragon pursuant to a Paragon Option Agreement. As a result, we may forgo or delay pursuit of opportunities with other programs that later prove to have greater commercial potential. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development programs for specific indications may not yield any commercially viable product candidates. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through collaboration, licensing, or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such product candidate. In addition, we select product candidates amongst a variety of potential product candidates from Paragon, and the product candidates we select may fail to be viable commercial products or the product candidates we do not select may have a greater likelihood of success.

Even if regulatory approval is obtained for a product candidate resulting from one of our current or future programs, they may not gain market acceptance among physicians, healthcare professionals, patients, healthcare payors, or the medical community. We may not generate or sustain revenue from sales of the product due to factors such as whether the product can be sold at a competitive cost and whether it will otherwise be accepted in the market. There are several approved products and product candidates in later stages of development for the treatment of solid tumors, including pembrolizumab. In addition, Opdivo, a PD-1 inhibitor, and Yervoy®, a CTLA-4 inhibitor, in combination are approved by the FDA for treating various cancers, including metastatic melanoma, advanced renal cell carcinoma, and certain types of colorectal cancer. CR-001 utilizes a proprietary anti-PD-1/anti-VEGF bispecific antibody for its proposed method of action, and is designed to recapitulate the targeting, binding, cooperativity and pharmacokinetics of ivonescimab, an anti-PD-1/anti-VEGF bispecific antibody that demonstrated significantly improved PFS to market-leading pembrolizumab in a large third-party Phase 3 clinical trial. Although checkpoint inhibitors are highly effective in some patients, most patients with solid tumors fail to respond to these therapies. Furthermore, patients who do respond do not always achieve durable responses. Market participants with significant influence over acceptance of new treatments, such as clinicians and third-party payors, may not adopt a biologic that uses cooperative binding qualities for our targeted indications, and we may not be able to convince the medical community and third-party payors to accept and use, or to provide favorable reimbursement for, any programs developed by us or our existing or future collaborators. Serious adverse events, including fatal pulmonary hemorrhage, observed in anti-VEGF inhibitors, such as bevacizumab, may adversely affect our ability to gain market acceptance. Market acceptance of our product candidates may be negatively impacted by potential poor performance of our competitors, including the occurrence of serious adverse events in such competitors’ clinical trials or failure by such competitors to obtain and maintain regulatory approval for their product candidates.

Sales of medical products also depend on the willingness of clinicians to prescribe the treatment. We cannot predict whether clinicians, clinicians’ organizations, hospitals, other healthcare providers, government agencies, or private insurers will determine that our product is safe, therapeutically effective, cost effective, or less burdensome as compared with competing treatments. If any of our product candidates are approved but does not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by such parties, we may not generate or derive sufficient revenue from that product candidate and may not become or remain profitable. Market acceptance of our product candidates will depend on many factors, including factors that are not within our control.

We are developing product candidates for the same indication, solid tumors, and may in the future develop our programs for other oncology indications. Each such program targets a different mechanism of action. However, developing multiple programs for a single indication may negatively impact our business if the programs compete with each other. For example, if multiple programs are conducting clinical trials at the same time, they could compete for the enrollment of patients. In addition, if multiple product candidates are approved for the same indication, they may compete for market share, which could limit our future revenue.

We may conduct clinical trials for programs at sites outside the United States, and the FDA may not accept data from trials conducted in such locations.

We may choose to conduct one or more of our future clinical trials outside the United States. Although the FDA may accept data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States, acceptance of this data is subject to conditions imposed by the FDA. In cases where data from foreign clinical trials are intended to serve as the sole basis for regulatory approval in the U.S., the FDA will generally not approve the application on the basis of foreign data alone unless (i) the data are applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice; (ii) the trials were performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence and pursuant to GCP regulations; and (iii) the data may be considered valid without the need for an on-site inspection by the FDA, or if the FDA considers such inspection to be necessary, the FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. In addition, even where the foreign study data are not intended to serve as the sole basis for approval, if the study was not otherwise subject to an IND, the FDA will not accept the data as support for an application for regulatory approval unless the study is well-designed and well-conducted in accordance with GCP requirements and the FDA is able to validate the data from the study through an onsite inspection if deemed necessary. Many foreign regulatory authorities have similar requirements for clinical data gathered outside of their respective jurisdictions. In addition, such foreign trials would be subject to the applicable local laws of the foreign jurisdictions where the trials are conducted.

There can be no assurance that the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority will accept data from trials conducted outside of the U.S. or the relevant jurisdiction. If the FDA does not accept the data from any trial that we conduct outside the United States, it would likely result in the need for additional trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and would delay or permanently halt our development of the applicable product candidates. Even if the FDA accepted such data, it could require us to modify our planned clinical trials to receive clearance to initiate such trials in the United States or to continue such trials once initiated.

Further, conducting international clinical trials presents additional risks that may delay completion of our clinical trials. These risks include the failure of enrolled patients in foreign countries to adhere to clinical protocol as a result of differences in healthcare services or cultural customs that could restrict or limit our ability to conduct our clinical trials, the administrative burdens of conducting clinical trials under multiple sets of foreign regulations, foreign exchange fluctuations, diminished protection of intellectual property in some countries, as well as political and economic risks relevant to foreign countries.

Risks Related to Government Regulation

The process of obtaining regulatory approvals, both in the United States and abroad, is unpredictable, expensive, and typically takes many years following commencement of clinical trials, if approval is obtained at all, and can vary substantially based upon a variety of factors, including the type, complexity, and novelty of the product candidates involved. We cannot commercialize product candidates in the United States without first obtaining regulatory approval from the FDA. Similarly, we cannot commercialize product candidates outside of the United States without obtaining regulatory approval from comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of our product candidates, including our lead program, CR-001, and other planned programs, CR-002 and CR-003, we must demonstrate through lengthy, complex, and expensive preclinical studies and clinical trials that our product candidates are both safe and effective for each targeted indication, or with respect to our product candidates regulated as biologics, that such candidates are safe, pure, and potent for their intended uses. Securing regulatory approval also requires the submission of information about the drug manufacturing process to, and inspection of manufacturing facilities by, the relevant regulatory authority. Further, our product candidates may not be effective, may be only moderately effective or may prove to have undesirable or unintended side effects, toxicities, or other characteristics that may preclude our obtaining regulatory and marketing approval. The FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities have substantial discretion in the approval process and may refuse to accept any application or may decide that our data are insufficient for approval and require additional preclinical, clinical, or other data. Our product candidates could be delayed in receiving, or fail to receive, regulatory approval for many reasons, including: the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with the design or implementation of our clinical trials; we may be unable to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities that a product candidate is safe, pure, potent, or effective for its proposed indication(s); the results of clinical trials may not meet the level of statistical persuasiveness required by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for approval; serious and unexpected drug-related side effects may be experienced by patients in our clinical trials or by individuals using drugs similar to our product candidates; we may be unable to demonstrate that a product candidate’s clinical and other benefits outweigh its safety risks; the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with our interpretation of data from preclinical studies or clinical trials; the data collected from clinical trials of our product candidates may not be acceptable or sufficient to support the submission of a Biologics License Application (“BLA”) or other submission or to obtain regulatory approval in the United States or elsewhere, and we may be required to conduct additional clinical trials; the FDA or the applicable foreign regulatory authority may disagree regarding the formulation, labeling, and/or the specifications of our product candidates; the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may fail to approve the manufacturing processes or facilities of third-party manufacturers with which we contract for clinical and commercial supplies; and the approval policies or regulations of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may significantly change in a manner rendering our clinical data insufficient for approval.

In addition, the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities may undergo leadership changes, change their policies, issue additional regulations, or revise existing regulations, or take other actions, which may impact our clinical development plans or prevent or delay approval of our programs under development on a timely basis. Such policy or regulatory changes could impose additional requirements upon us that could delay our ability to obtain approvals and increase the costs of compliance.

If we were to obtain approval, regulatory authorities may approve any of our product candidates for fewer or more limited indications than we request, including failing to approve the most commercially promising indications, may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly post-marketing clinical trials, or may approve a product candidate with a label that does not include the labeling claims necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of that product candidate. If we are not able to obtain, or if there are delays in obtaining, required regulatory approvals for our product candidates, we will not be able to commercialize, or will be delayed in commercializing, our product candidates and our ability to generate revenue will be materially impaired.

In addition, as product candidates progress through clinical trials to regulatory approval and commercialization, it is common that various aspects of the development program, such as manufacturing methods and formulation, are altered along the way in an effort to optimize safety, efficacy, stability, purity, yield and manufacturing batch size, minimize costs and achieve consistent quality and results. Such changes carry the risk that they will not achieve these intended objectives and/or may lead to delays and additional costs. Additionally, any changes we may make to our product candidates may cause such candidates to perform differently than in prior clinical trials, or could negatively affect our ability to utilize or interpret our existing data. Such changes could delay initiation or completion of clinical trials, lead to negative trial results, require the conduct of bridging studies or clinical trials or the repetition of one or more studies or clinical trials, increase development costs, delay potential regulatory approval and jeopardize our ability to commercialize our product candidates or generate revenue.

We believe that any of our product candidates approved as biologics under a BLA should qualify for the 12-year period of exclusivity. However, there is a risk that this exclusivity could be shortened due to congressional action or otherwise, or that the FDA will not consider our product candidates to be reference products for competing products, potentially creating the opportunity for competition sooner than anticipated. Other aspects of the BPCIA, some of which may impact the BPCIA exclusivity provisions, have also been the subject of litigation. Moreover, the extent to which a biosimilar, once approved, will be substituted for any reference products in a way that is similar to traditional generic substitution for non-biological products will depend on a number of uncertain marketplace and regulatory factors.

Even if we receive regulatory approval of our product candidates, we will be subject to extensive ongoing regulatory obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or experiences unanticipated problems with our product candidates.

Any regulatory approvals that we may receive for our product candidates will require the submission of reports to regulatory authorities and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate, may contain significant limitations related to use restrictions for specified age groups, warnings, precautions, or contraindications, and may include burdensome post-approval study or risk management requirements. For example, the FDA may require a REMS in order to approve our product candidates, which could entail requirements for a medication guide, physician training, and communication plans or additional elements to ensure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries, and other risk minimization tools. In addition, if the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities approve our product candidates, our product candidates and the activities associated with their development and commercialization, including their design, testing, manufacture, safety, efficacy, recordkeeping, labeling, storage, approval, advertising, promotion, sale, distribution, import and export will be subject to comprehensive regulation by the FDA and other regulatory agencies in the United States and by comparable foreign regulatory authorities. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration, as well as on-going compliance with current Good Manufacturing Practices (“cGMPs”) and GCPs for any clinical trials that we conduct following approval. In addition, manufacturers of drug products and their facilities are subject to continual review and periodic, unannounced inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with cGMPs.

If we or a regulatory authority discovers previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facilities where the product is manufactured, or if we are unable to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, a regulatory authority may impose restrictions on that product, the manufacturing facility, or us, including requiring recall or withdrawal of the product from the market or suspension of manufacturing, restrictions on our ability to conduct clinical trials, including full or partial clinical holds on ongoing or planned trials, refusals to approve pending applications, restrictions on the manufacturing process, warning or untitled letters, civil and criminal penalties, injunctions, product seizures, detentions or import bans, voluntary or mandatory publicity requirements, and imposition of restrictions on operations, including costly new manufacturing requirements. The occurrence of any event or penalty described above may inhibit our ability to commercialize our product candidates and generate revenue and could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity.

Existing regulatory policies may change, and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. For example, the Trump Administration has discussed several changes to the reach and oversight of the FDA, which could affect its relationship with the pharmaceutical industry, transparency in decision-making and ultimately the cost and availability of prescription drugs. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any regulatory and marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.

Ensuring that our internal operations and future business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental laws and regulations that may apply to it, we may be subject to significant penalties, including civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from government-funded healthcare programs, integrity oversight and reporting obligations to resolve allegations of non-compliance, disgorgement, individual imprisonment, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. Further, defending against any such actions can be costly and time-consuming and may require significant personnel resources. Therefore, even if we are successful in defending against any such actions that may be brought against it, our business may be impaired.

We intend to seek approval to market our product candidates in both the United States and in selected foreign jurisdictions. If we obtain approval in one or more foreign jurisdictions for our product candidates, we will be subject to rules and regulations in those jurisdictions. Our ability to successfully commercialize any product candidates that we may develop will depend in part on the extent to which reimbursement for these product candidates and related treatments will be available from government health administration authorities, private health insurers, and other organizations. Government authorities and other third-party payors, such as private health insurers and health maintenance organizations, decide which medications they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels. Government authorities and other third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medications. These entities may create preferential access policies for a competitor’s product, including a branded or generic/biosimilar product, over our products in an attempt to reduce their costs, which may reduce our commercial opportunity. Additionally, if any of our product candidates are approved and we are found to have improperly promoted off-label uses of those product candidates, we may become subject to significant liability, which would materially adversely affect our business and financial condition.

In some countries, particularly member states of the EU (“EU Member States”), the pricing of prescription drugs is subject to governmental control. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after receipt of regulatory and marketing approval for a therapeutic. In addition, there can be considerable pressure by governments and other stakeholders on prices and reimbursement levels, including as part of cost containment measures. Political, economic, and regulatory developments may further complicate pricing negotiations, and pricing negotiations may continue after reimbursement has been obtained. Reference pricing used by various EU Member States and parallel distribution, or arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced EU Member States, can further reduce prices. To obtain coverage and reimbursement or pricing approvals in some countries, we or current or future collaborators may be required to conduct a clinical trial or other studies that compare the cost-effectiveness of our product candidates to other available therapies in order to obtain or maintain reimbursement or pricing approval. Publication of discounts by third-party payors or authorities may lead to further pressure on the prices or reimbursement levels within the country of publication and other countries. If reimbursement of any product candidate approved for marketing is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, our business, financial condition, results of operations, or prospects could be materially and adversely affected. Brexit could lead to legal uncertainty and potentially divergent national laws and regulations, including those related to the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals, as the United Kingdom (“UK”) determines which EU laws to replicate or replace. If the UK were to significantly alter its regulations affecting the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals, we could face significant new costs.

We may attempt to obtain accelerated approval of our product candidates. If we are unable to obtain accelerated approval, we may be required to conduct clinical trials beyond those that we contemplate, or the size and duration of our pivotal clinical trials could be greater than currently planned, which could increase the expense of obtaining, reduce the likelihood of obtaining, and/or delay the timing of obtaining necessary regulatory approvals. Even if we receive accelerated approval from the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require that we conduct confirmatory trials to verify clinical benefit. If such confirmatory trials do not verify clinical benefit, or if we do not comply with rigorous post-approval requirements, the FDA may seek to withdraw any accelerated approval we have obtained.

We may seek accelerated approval for our product candidates. The FDA may grant accelerated approval to a product candidate designed to treat a serious or life-threatening condition that provides meaningful therapeutic advantage over available therapies and upon a determination that the product candidate has an effect on a surrogate endpoint or intermediate clinical endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. For the purposes of accelerated approval, a surrogate endpoint is a marker, such as a laboratory measurement, radiographic image, physical sign, or other measure that is thought to predict clinical benefit, but is not itself a measure of clinical benefit. An intermediate clinical endpoint is a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. The FDA considers a clinical benefit to be a positive therapeutic effect that is clinically meaningful in the context of a given disease.

If granted, accelerated approval is usually contingent on the sponsor’s agreement to conduct, in a diligent manner, additional confirmatory studies to verify and describe the drug’s predicted effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. Under the Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act of 2022, the FDA may require, as appropriate, that any such confirmatory study be initiated or substantially underway prior to the submission of an application for accelerated approval. If such post-approval studies fail to confirm the drug’s clinical benefits relative to its risks, the FDA may withdraw its approval of the drug on an expedited basis.

If we choose to pursue accelerated approval, there can be no assurance that the FDA will agree that we have identified appropriate surrogate or intermediate endpoints. Similarly, there can be no assurance that after subsequent FDA feedback that we will continue to pursue accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review, or approval, even if we initially decide to do so. Furthermore, if we submit an application for accelerated approval, there can be no assurance that such application will be accepted or that approval will be granted on a timely basis, or at all. The FDA also could require us to conduct further studies or trials prior to considering our application or granting approval of any type.

Even if we receive accelerated approval of any of our product candidates from the FDA, we will be subject to rigorous post-approval requirements, including submission to the FDA of all promotional materials prior to their dissemination, and will likely be required by FDA to conduct a confirmatory study to verify the predicted clinical benefit. The FDA could withdraw accelerated approval for multiple reasons, including our failure to conduct any required post-approval study with due diligence, or the inability of such study to confirm the predicted clinical benefit. A failure to obtain accelerated approval or any other form of expedited review or approval for a product candidate could result in a longer time period prior to commercializing such product candidate, if ever, increase the cost of development of such product candidate, and harm our competitive position in the marketplace.

A breakthrough therapy, fast track, or other expedited designation for our product candidates may not lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process, and it does not increase the likelihood that those product candidates will receive regulatory and marketing approval.

We may seek a breakthrough therapy, fast track, or other designation for appropriate product candidates. Designations such as these are within the discretion of the FDA, or other comparable regulatory authorities. The receipt of a designation for a product candidate may not result in a faster development process, review, or approval compared to products considered for approval under conventional FDA procedures and does not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, even if one or more of our product candidates qualifies under one of FDA’s designation programs, the FDA may later decide that the products no longer meet the conditions for qualification or decide that the time period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened.

Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may also slow the time necessary for the review and approval of applications for clinical trial or marketing authorization, which would adversely affect our business. For example, in previous years, including in 2018 and 2019 and 2025, the U.S. government shut down and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA and the SEC, had to furlough critical employees and stop critical activities. In addition, the current U.S. Presidential administration has issued certain policies and Executive Orders directed towards reducing the employee headcount and costs associated with U.S. administrative agencies, including the FDA, and it remains unclear the degree to which these efforts may limit or otherwise adversely affect the FDA’s ability to conduct routine activities, or otherwise affect our ability to progress development of our product candidates or obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates.

If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, if there is a significant change or reduction in agency personnel, or if funding shortages prevent the FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA or other regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

We do not currently own any issued patents or pending patent applications. Therefore, our ability to obtain and protect our patent rights, and protect other proprietary rights, is uncertain, exposing us to the possible loss of competitive advantage.

Our success depends in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection for our platform technologies, programs, and their uses, as well as our ability to operate without infringing on or violating the proprietary rights of others. Our ability to protect our technologies from unauthorized making, using, selling, offering to sell, or importing by third parties is dependent on the extent to which we have rights under valid and enforceable patents that cover these activities. We rely upon a combination of future patents, trademarks, trade secret protection, confidentiality agreements, and the Paragon Option Agreements to protect the intellectual property related to our programs and technologies. We do not currently own any patents, but we expect to license certain patent rights from Paragon and, in the future, prosecute underlying intellectual property for some or all of the in-licensed or owned product candidates that we develop. Paragon has filed provisional patent applications and intends to file one or more additional provisional patent applications directed to antibodies that target PD-1 and VEGF, including applications covering composition of matter, pharmaceutical formulations, and methods of using such antibodies, including CR-001. In addition, Paragon intends to file one or more additional provisional patent applications directed to ADCs, including applications covering composition of matter, pharmaceutical formulations, and methods of using such antibodies, including CR-002 and CR-003. However, we may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world and the legal systems in certain countries may not favor enforcement or protection of patents, trade secrets, and other intellectual property. Filing, prosecuting, and defending patents on programs worldwide would be expensive and our intellectual property rights in some foreign jurisdictions can be less extensive than those in the United States; the reverse may also occur. As such, we may not have patents in all countries or all major markets and may not be able to obtain patents in all jurisdictions even if we apply for them. Our competitors may operate in countries where we do not have patent protection and can freely use our technologies and discoveries in such countries to the extent such technologies and discoveries are publicly known or disclosed in countries where we do have patent protection or pending patent applications.

Our intellectual property portfolio is at an early stage. We do not currently own any issued patents or pending patent applications. Our future optioned in-licensed or owned patent applications may not result in patents being issued. Any issued patents may not afford sufficient protection of our programs or their intended uses against competitors, nor can there be any assurance that the patents issued will not be infringed, designed around, invalidated by third parties, or effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies, products, or programs. Even if these patents are granted, they may be difficult to enforce. If we do not obtain patent coverage for the work we are conducting, or if we obtain such rights but they are invalidated or rendered unenforceable, we may be unable to exclude competitors from pursuing and marketing the same or similar product candidates. Other risks we face if we are not able to obtain and maintain patent coverage for our product candidates are the reduction in valuation of our product candidates, and ultimately of us as a company, by potential investors, and our inability to assert claims for infringement against third parties or counterclaim against such third parties or negotiate more advantageous settlement parameters Further, any issued patents that we may license or own covering our programs could be narrowed or found invalid or unenforceable if challenged in court or before administrative bodies in the United States or abroad, including the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”). Further, if we encounter our in our clinical trials or delays in obtaining regulatory approval, the period of time during which we could market our product candidates under patent protection would be reduced. Thus, the patents that we may own and license may not afford us any meaningful competitive advantage.

In addition to seeking patents for some of our technology and programs, we may also rely on trade secrets, including unpatented know-how, technology, and other proprietary information, to maintain our competitive position. Any disclosure, either intentional or unintentional, by our employees, the employees of third parties with whom we share our facilities, or third-party consultants and vendors that we engage to perform research, clinical trials, or manufacturing activities, or misappropriation by third parties (such as through a cybersecurity breach) of our trade secrets or proprietary information could enable competitors to duplicate or surpass our technological achievements, thus eroding our competitive position in our market. In order to protect our proprietary technology and processes, we rely in part on confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, material transfer agreements, consulting agreements, or other similar agreements prior to beginning research or disclosing proprietary information with parties, such as collaborators, employees, consultants, outside scientific collaborators, and sponsored researchers and other advisors. We also enter into confidentiality and invention or patent assignment agreements with our employees and consultants under which they are obligated to maintain confidentiality and to assign their inventions to us. These agreements typically limit the rights of the third parties to use or disclose our confidential information, including our trade secrets. These agreements may not effectively prevent disclosure of confidential information and may not provide an adequate remedy in the event of unauthorized disclosure of confidential information. We may need to share our proprietary information, including trade secrets, with future business partners, collaborators, contractors, and others located in countries at heightened risk of theft of trade secrets, including through direct intrusion by private parties or state actors and those affiliated with or controlled by state actors. In addition, while we undertake efforts to protect our trade secrets and other confidential information from disclosure, others may independently discover trade secrets and proprietary information, and in such cases, we may not be able to assert any trade secret rights against such party. Enforcing a claim that a party disclosed or misappropriated our trade secrets, or securing title to an employee- or consultant-developed invention if a dispute arises, is challenging and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, courts outside of the United States may be less willing to protect trade secrets. Costly and time-consuming litigation could be necessary to enforce and determine the scope of our proprietary rights and failure to obtain or maintain trade secret protection could adversely affect our competitive business position.

The enforceability of confidentiality agreements may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In addition, these agreements typically restrict the ability of our advisors, employees, third-party contractors, and consultants to publish data potentially relating to our trade secrets, although our agreements may contain certain limited publication rights. Despite our efforts to protect our trade secrets, competitors may discover our trade secrets, either through breach of our agreements with third parties, independent development, or publication of information by any of our third-party collaborators. A competitor’s discovery of our trade secrets would impair our competitive position and have an adverse impact on our business.

If we are unable to obtain or maintain necessary rights to our programs through acquisitions and in-licenses, our business may be materially harmed.

Because our development programs currently do and may in the future require the use of proprietary rights held by third parties, the growth of our business may depend in part on our ability to acquire, in-license, or use these third-party proprietary rights. We may be unable to acquire or in-license any compositions, methods of use, processes, or other third-party intellectual property rights from third parties that we identify as necessary for our programs. The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and a number of more established companies may pursue strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive or necessary. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, capital resources, and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. We also may be unable to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights on commercially reasonable terms or at all. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property rights or maintain the existing intellectual property rights we do obtain, our ability to commercialize any of our targeted therapeutics, if approved, would likely be delayed, or we may have to abandon development of the relevant program, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

While we plan to obtain the right to control prosecution, defense, maintenance, and enforcement of the patents relating to our programs, there may be times when the filing and prosecution activities for patents and patent applications relating to our programs are controlled by future licensors or collaboration partners. For example, Paragon currently has the right to file patent applications and control prosecution with respect to any inventions that may fall within the ADC Paragon Option Agreement for CR-002 and CR-003. If we, Paragon, or any of our future licensors or collaboration partners fail to prosecute, maintain, and enforce such patents and patent applications in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business, including by payment of all applicable fees for patents covering our product candidates, we could lose our rights to the intellectual property or our exclusivity with respect to those rights, our ability to develop and commercialize those product candidates may be adversely affected, and we may not be able to prevent competitors from making, using, and selling competing products. In addition, even where we are granted the right to control patent prosecution of patents and patent applications we have licensed to and from third parties, we may still be adversely affected or prejudiced by actions or inactions of our licensees, our future licensors and their counsel that took place prior to the date upon which we assumed control over patent prosecution. For example, because we have not yet entered into a license agreement for CR-002 or CR-003, Paragon is currently responsible for the prosecution, defense, maintenance, and enforcement of patents related to such programs. Subsequent to entering into a license agreement with Paragon for each such program, we expect to control patent prosecution over such program following the trigger for transfer of prosecution control to us.

It is possible that we may be unable to obtain licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. Even if we are able to obtain a license, it may be non-exclusive, including with respect to the use, field, or territory of the licensed intellectual property, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to redesign our technology, programs, or the methods for manufacturing them or to develop or license replacement technology, all of which may not be feasible on a technical or commercial basis. If we are unable to do so, we may be unable to develop or commercialize the affected product candidates, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects significantly. We cannot provide any assurances that third-party patents do not exist which might be enforced against our current technology, manufacturing methods, programs, or future methods or products resulting in either an injunction prohibiting our manufacture or future sales, or, with respect to our future sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties and/or other forms of compensation to third parties, which could be significant.

We may be subject to patent infringement claims or may need to file claims to protect our intellectual property, which could result in substantial costs and liability and prevent us from commercializing our potential products.

Because the intellectual property landscape in the biotechnology industry is rapidly evolving and interdisciplinary, it is difficult to conclusively assess our freedom to operate and guarantee that we can operate without infringing on or violating third-party rights. If certain of our product candidates are ultimately granted regulatory approval, patent rights held by third parties, if found to be valid and enforceable, could be alleged to render one or more of our product candidates infringing. If a third party successfully brings a claim against us, we may be required to pay substantial damages, be forced to abandon any affected product candidate and/or seek a license from the patent holder. In addition, any intellectual property claims (e.g., patent infringement or trade secret misappropriation) brought against us, whether or not successful, may cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert the attention of our management and key personnel from other business concerns. We cannot be certain that future patents, if filed and issued, owned, or licensed by us will not be challenged by others, whether in the course of litigation or in agencies like the USPTO. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of complex intellectual property litigation more effectively than we can because they have substantially greater resources. In addition, any uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of any litigation could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise funds.

Competitors may infringe or otherwise violate our future patents, trademarks, copyrights, or other intellectual property. To counter infringement or other violations, we may be required to file claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. Any such claims could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us, including claims alleging that we infringe their patents or other intellectual property rights and/or that our patents are invalid and/or unenforceable. In addition, in a patent infringement proceeding, a court or administrative body may decide that one or more of the patents we assert is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, construe the patent’s claims narrowly or refuse to prevent the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology. Similarly, if we assert trademark infringement claims, a court or administrative body may determine that the marks we have asserted are invalid or unenforceable or that the party against whom we have asserted trademark infringement has superior rights to the marks in question. In such a case, we could ultimately be forced to cease use of such marks. In any intellectual property litigation, even if we are successful, any award of monetary damages or other remedy we receive may not be commercially valuable.

Further, we may be required to protect our future patents, if filed and issued, through procedures created to challenge the validity of a patent before administrative bodies in the United States such as the USPTO or abroad. Such mechanisms include re-examination, post grant review and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions, e.g., opposition proceedings. An adverse determination in any such submission or proceeding could reduce the scope or enforceability of, or invalidate, our patent rights, which could adversely affect our competitive position. Because of a lower evidentiary standard in USPTO proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in U.S. federal courts necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a claim invalid even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the claim if first presented in a district court action.

In addition, if our programs are found to infringe the intellectual property rights of third parties, these third parties may assert infringement claims against our future licensees and other parties with whom we have business relationships and we may be required to indemnify those parties for any damages they suffer as a result of these claims, which may require us to initiate or defend protracted and costly litigation on behalf of licensees and other parties regardless of the merits of such claims. If any of these claims succeed, we may be forced to pay damages on behalf of those parties or may be required to obtain licenses for the products they use.

As is common in the biotechnology industry, in addition to our employees, we engage the service of consultants to assist us in the development of our programs. Many of these consultants, and many of our employees, were previously employed at, or may have previously provided or may be currently providing consulting services to, other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies including our competitors or potential competitors. We could in the future be subject to claims that we or our employees have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed alleged trade secrets or other confidential information of former employers or competitors. Although we try to ensure that our employees and consultants do not use the intellectual property, proprietary information, know-how, or trade secrets of others in their work for us, we may become subject to claims that we caused an employee to breach the terms of his or her non-competition or non-solicitation agreement, or that we or these individuals have, inadvertently or otherwise, used or disclosed the alleged trade secrets or other proprietary information of a former employer or competitor.

While we may litigate to defend itself against these claims, even if we are successful, litigation could result in substantial costs and could be a distraction to management. If our defenses to these claims fail, in addition to requiring us to pay monetary damages, a court could prohibit us from using technologies or features that are essential to our programs, if such technologies or features are found to incorporate or be derived from the trade secrets or other proprietary information of the former employers. Moreover, any such litigation or the threat thereof may adversely affect our reputation, our ability to form strategic alliances or sublicense our rights to collaborators, engage with scientific advisors, or hire employees or consultants, each of which would have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management.

Although we do not currently own or in-license any patents or applications, if we obtain such patents and applications in the future, changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of patent laws in the United States, including patent reform legislation such as the Leahy-Smith Act could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our owned and in-licensed patent applications, if any, and the maintenance, enforcement, or defense of our owned and in-licensed issued patents, if any. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to United States patent law. These changes include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted, redefine prior art, provide more efficient and cost-effective avenues for competitors to challenge the validity of patents, and enable third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent at USPTO-administered post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review, and derivation proceedings. Assuming that other requirements for patentability are met, prior to March 2013, in the United States, the first to invent the claimed invention was entitled to the patent, while outside the United States, the first to file a patent application was entitled to the patent. After March 2013, under the Leahy-Smith Act, the United States transitioned to a first-to-file system in which, assuming that the other statutory requirements for patentability 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. As such, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications, if any, and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, if any, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. Additionally, the USPTO and patent offices in other jurisdictions have often required that patent applications directed to pharmaceutical and/or biotechnology-related inventions be limited or narrowed substantially to cover only the specific innovations exemplified in the patent application, thereby limiting the scope of protection against competitive challenges. Accordingly, even if we or our licensors are able to obtain patents, the patents might be substantially narrower than anticipated. Thus, there is no assurance as to the degree and range of protections any of our patents, if issued, may afford us or whether patents will be issued.

In addition, a European Unified Patent Court (“UPC”) entered into force on June 1, 2023. The UPC is a common patent court that hears patent infringement and revocation proceedings effective for EU Member States. The broad geographic reach of the UPC could enable third parties to seek revocation of any of our future European patents in a single proceeding at the UPC rather than through multiple proceedings in each of the individual European Union member states in which the European patent is validated. Under the UPC, a successful revocation proceeding for a European Patent under the UPC would result in loss of patent protection in those European Union countries. Accordingly, a single proceeding under the UPC could result in the partial or complete loss of patent protection in numerous European Union countries. Such a loss of patent protection could have a material adverse impact on our business and our ability to commercialize our technology and product candidates and, resultantly, on our business, financial condition, prospects, and results of operations. Moreover, the controlling laws and regulations of the UPC will develop over time and we cannot predict what the outcomes of cases tried before the UPC will be. The case law of the UPC may adversely affect our ability to enforce or defend the validity of our European patents. Patent owners have the option to opt-out their European patents from the jurisdiction of the UPC, defaulting to pre-UPC enforcement mechanisms.

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuities fees, and various other governmental fees on patents and/or patent applications are due to be paid to the USPTO and foreign patent agencies in several stages over the lifetime of the patent and/or patent application. The USPTO and various foreign governmental patent agencies also require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment, and other similar provisions during the patent application process. While an inadvertent lapse can in many cases be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which noncompliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Non-compliance events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application include, but are not limited to, failure to respond to official actions within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees, and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents. If we fail to maintain any future patents and patent applications, if filed and issued, covering our programs, our competitive position would be adversely affected.

We cannot guarantee that any of our patent searches or analyses, including the identification of relevant patents, the scope of patent claims or the expiration of relevant patents, are complete or thorough, nor can we be certain that we have identified each and every third-party patent and pending application in the United States and abroad that is relevant to or necessary for the commercialization of our product candidates in any jurisdiction. The scope of a patent claim is determined by an interpretation of the law, the written disclosure in a patent, the patent’s prosecution history, and in some cases certain extrinsic evidence of the meaning of terms in a claim. Our interpretation of the relevance or the scope of a patent or a pending application may be incorrect. For example, we may incorrectly determine that our products are not covered by a third-party patent or may incorrectly predict whether a third-party’s pending application will issue with claims of relevant scope. Our determination of the expiration date of any patent in the United States or abroad that we consider relevant may be incorrect. Our failure to identify and correctly interpret relevant patents may negatively impact our ability to develop and market our products.

In addition, because some patent applications in the United States may be maintained in secrecy until the patents are issued, patent applications in the United States and many foreign jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing, and publications in the scientific literature often lag behind actual discoveries, we cannot be certain that others have not filed patent applications for technology covered by our future issued patents or our pending applications, if filed, or that we were the first to invent the technology. Our competitors may have filed, and may in the future file, patent applications covering products or technology similar to ours. Any such patent application may have priority over our future patent applications or patents, if filed and issued, which could require us to obtain rights to issued patents covering such technologies.

We may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators, or other third parties have an interest in our future patents, if filed and issued, or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. The failure to name the proper inventors on a patent application can result in the patents issuing thereon being invalid or unenforceable. Inventorship disputes may arise from conflicting views regarding the contributions of different individuals named as inventors, the effects of foreign laws where foreign nationals are involved in the development of the subject matter of the patent, conflicting obligations of third parties involved in developing our programs, or as a result of questions regarding co-ownership of potential joint inventions. Litigation may be necessary to resolve these and other claims challenging inventorship and/or ownership. While we typically require employees, consultants, and contractors who may develop intellectual property on our behalf to execute agreements assigning such intellectual property to us, we may be unsuccessful in obtaining execution of assignment agreements with each party who in fact develops intellectual property that we regard as our own. Moreover, even when we obtain agreements assigning intellectual property to us, the assignment of intellectual property rights may not be self-executing or the assignment agreements may be breached. In either case, we may be forced to bring claims against third parties, or defend claims that they may bring against us, to determine the ownership of what we regard as our intellectual property. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees.

Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, if all maintenance fees are timely paid, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from its earliest United States non-provisional filing date or international Patent Cooperation Treaty Filing. The patent term of a U.S. patent may be lengthened by patent term adjustment, which compensates a patentee for administrative delays by the USPTO in granting a patent, or may be shortened if a patent is terminally disclaimed over an earlier-filed patent.

Various extensions may be available, but the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Even if patents covering our product candidates are obtained, once the patent life has expired, we may be open to competition from competitive products, including generics or biosimilars. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such product candidates might expire before or shortly after such product candidates are commercialized. As a result, our owned and licensed patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.

In the United States, the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 permits a Patent Term Extension (“PTE”) of up to five years beyond the normal expiration of the patent to compensate patent owners for loss of an enforceable patent term due to the lengthy regulatory approval process. A PTE grant cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of the product approval. Further, PTE may only be applied once per product, and only with respect to an approved indication - in other words, only one patent (for example, covering the product itself, an approved use of said product, or a method of manufacturing said product) can be extended by PTE. We anticipate applying for PTE in the United States. Similar extensions may be available in other countries where we anticipate prosecuting patents, and we likewise anticipate applying for such extensions.

The granting of a PTE is not guaranteed and is subject to numerous requirements. We might not be granted an extension because of, for example, failure to apply within applicable periods, failure to apply prior to the expiration of relevant patents or otherwise failure to satisfy any of the numerous applicable requirements. In addition, to the extent we wish to pursue a PTE based on a patent that we in-license from a third party, we would need the cooperation of that third party. Moreover, the applicable authorities, including the FDA and the USPTO in the United States, and any equivalent regulatory authority in other countries, may not agree with our assessment of whether such extensions are available, and may refuse to grant extensions to our patents, or may grant more limited extensions than we request. If this occurs, our competitors may be able to obtain approval of competing products following our patent expiration by referencing our clinical and preclinical data and launch their product earlier than might otherwise be the case. If this were to occur, it could have a material adverse effect on our ability to generate revenue.

Our technology licensed from various third parties in the future, including Paragon, may be subject to retained rights.

Our future licensors may retain certain rights under the relevant agreements with us, including the right to use or license the licensed technology outside of the scope of our license, use the underlying technology for noncommercial academic and research use, to publish general scientific findings from research related to the technology, and to make customary scientific and scholarly disclosures of information relating to the technology. It is difficult to monitor whether our licensors limit their use of the technology to these uses, and we could incur substantial expenses to enforce our rights to our licensed technology in the event of misuse. In addition, while there are certain restrictions on Paragon’s ability to develop products that could be competitive with ours, these restrictions may not prevent the possible future license or development by Paragon of certain technology that could lead to product candidates competitive with ours. This could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

We expect to rely on licensing arrangements with Paragon through the Paragon Option Agreements. If we are unable to maintain collaborations or licensing arrangements, or if our collaborations or licensing arrangements are not successful, our business could be negatively impacted.

We expect to rely on our current and future licensing arrangements with Paragon, including through the Paragon Option Agreements, for a substantial portion of our discovery capabilities, including for CR-001, CR-002, and CR-003, and in-licenses.

Collaborations or licensing arrangements that we enter into may not be successful, including in connection with the Paragon Option Agreements, and any success will depend heavily on the efforts and activities of such collaborators or licensors. If any of our current or future collaborators or licensors experiences delays in performance of, or fails to perform its obligations under their agreement with us, disagrees with our interpretation of the terms of such agreement, or terminates their agreement with us, our programs could be adversely affected. If we fail to comply with any of the obligations under our collaborations or license agreements, including payment terms and diligence terms, our collaborators or licensors may have the right to terminate such agreements, in which event we may lose intellectual property rights and may not be able to develop, manufacture, market, or sell the products covered by our agreements or may face other penalties under our agreements. Our collaborators and licensors may also fail to properly maintain or defend the intellectual property we have licensed from them, if required by our agreement with them, or even infringe upon, our intellectual property rights, leading to the potential invalidation of our intellectual property or subjecting us to litigation or arbitration, any of which would be time-consuming and expensive and could harm our ability to commercialize our product candidates. In addition, collaborators could independently develop, or develop with third parties, products that compete directly or indirectly with our programs and products if the collaborators believe that the competitive products are more likely to be successfully developed or can be commercialized under terms that are more economically attractive than ours.

As part of our strategy, we plan to evaluate additional opportunities to enhance our capabilities and expand our development pipeline or provide development or commercialization capabilities that complement ours. We may not realize the benefits of such collaborations, alliances, or licensing arrangements. Any of these relationships may require us to incur non-recurring and other charges, increase our near and long-term expenditures, issue securities that dilute our existing shareholders, or disrupt our management and business.

We have utilized and plan to continue to utilize and depend upon independent investigators and collaborators, such as medical institutions, CROs, contract testing labs, and strategic partners, to conduct and support our preclinical studies and clinical trials under agreements with us. We will rely heavily on these third parties over the course of our preclinical studies and clinical trials, and we control only certain aspects of their activities. As a result, we will have less direct control over the conduct, timing, and completion of these preclinical studies and clinical trials and the management of data developed through preclinical studies and clinical trials than would be the case if we were relying entirely upon our own staff. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our studies and trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory, and scientific standards, and our reliance on these third parties does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and our third-party contractors and CROs are required to comply with GCP regulations, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for all of our programs in clinical development. If we or any of these third parties fail to comply with applicable GCP regulations, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our clinical trials comply with GCP regulations. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with products produced under cGMP regulations. Our failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process. Moreover, our business may be implicated if any of these third parties violates federal or state fraud and abuse or false claims laws and regulations or healthcare privacy and security laws.

Any third parties conducting our clinical trials will not be our employees and, except for remedies available to us under our agreements with such third parties, we cannot control whether they devote sufficient time and resources to our programs. These third parties may be involved in mergers, acquisitions, or similar transactions and may have relationships with other commercial entities, including our competitors, for whom they may also be conducting clinical trials or other product development activities, which could negatively affect their performance on our behalf and the timing thereof and could lead to products that compete directly or indirectly with our product candidates. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, if they need to be replaced or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols or regulatory requirements or for other reasons, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed, or terminated and we may not be able to complete development of, obtain regulatory approval of, or successfully commercialize our product candidates.

In addition, we currently rely on foreign CROs and CMOs, including WuXi Biologics (Hong Kong) Limited (“WuXi”) for formulation and manufacturing of our stage 1 clinical trial materials, and will likely continue to rely on foreign CROs and CMOs in the future. In October 2025, both the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate passed their respective versions of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2026 (NDAA), and the Senate version includes an amendment often referred to as “BIOSECURE 2.0”. While BIOSECURE 2.0 has not yet been enacted and must still be reconciled in conference, the current text would establish federal government contracting, grant, and loan restrictions on companies that use biotechnology equipment or services from certain foreign providers. As currently proposed, BIOSECURE 2.0 would implement a process-based designation system through which biotechnology companies “of concern” would be identified based on whether such companies fall within statutorily defined categories, including entities identified on the Department of Defense’s Section 1260H list of “Chinese military companies” and other entities that are subject to the direction, control, or jurisdiction of a foreign adversary’s government which pose national security risks based on specified criteria. If BIOSECURE 2.0 becomes law or similar laws are passed, they may prohibit federal agencies from entering into procurement contracts with an entity that uses biotechnology equipment or services from a biotechnology company of concern. While WuXi is not currently listed as a biotechnology company of concern, an affiliate of WuXi was specifically named in a prior version of BIOSECURE 2.0. Foreign CMOs may be subject to U.S. legislation, including the proposed BIOSECURE Act, trade restrictions, and other foreign regulatory requirements which could increase the cost or reduce the supply of material available to us, delay the procurement or supply of such material or have an adverse effect on our ability to secure significant commitments from governments to purchase our potential therapies. For example, in April 2025, the United States government imposed significant tariffs on imports from China and other countries and may impose more restrictions on goods, including biologically derived substances, manufactured in or imported from China or impose other restrictions on companies’ ability to work with Chinese biotech companies. Certain of these tariffs have gone into effect. There remains substantial uncertainty regarding future tariff rates and the countries and products to which such tariffs would apply. To the extent these or future tariffs are applicable to the material we import from China and other countries, our financial condition could be adversely affected.

Further, the biopharmaceutical industry in China is strictly regulated by the Chinese government. Changes to Chinese regulations or government policies affecting biopharmaceutical companies are unpredictable and may have a material adverse effect on our collaborators in China which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. Evolving changes in China’s public health, economic, political, and social conditions and the uncertainty around China’s relationship with other governments, such as the United States and the UK, could also negatively impact our ability to manufacture our product candidates for our planned clinical trials or have an adverse effect on our ability to secure government funding, which could adversely affect our financial condition and cause us to delay our clinical development programs. Furthermore, if the BIOSECURE Act is passed and one or more of our collaborators or vendors in China, including WuXi, is deemed to be a biotechnology company of concern, our operations and financial condition may be negatively impacted as a result of any delays or increased costs arising from the trade restrictions and other foreign regulatory requirements affecting such collaborators. In addition, while we have established relationships with CROs and CMOs outside of China, moving to those suppliers in the event of a geopolitical instability affecting our collaborators in China could introduce delays into the development program.

We currently rely and expect to rely in the future on the use of manufacturing sites in third-party facilities or on third parties to manufacture our product candidates, and we may rely on third parties to produce and process our products, if approved. Our business could be adversely affected if we are unable to use third-party manufacturing suites or if the third-party manufacturers encounter difficulties in production.

We do not currently own any facility that may be used as our clinical or commercial manufacturing and processing facility and must currently rely on CMOs to manufacture our product candidates. We have not yet caused any product candidates to be manufactured on a commercial scale and may not be able to do so for any of our product candidates, if approved. We currently have a sole source relationship for our supply of the CR-001 and CR-002 programs, and expect to have a sole source relationship for the supply of the CR-003 program. If there should be any disruption in such supply arrangement, including any adverse events affecting our sole supplier, it could have a negative effect on the clinical development of our programs and other operations while we work to identify and qualify an alternate supply source. We may not control the manufacturing process of, and may be completely dependent on, our contract manufacturing partners for compliance with cGMP requirements and any other regulatory requirements of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for the manufacture of our product candidates. Beyond periodic audits, we have limited control over the ability of our CMOs to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance, and qualified personnel. If the FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority does not approve these facilities for the manufacture of our product candidates or if it withdraws any approval in the future, we may need to find alternative manufacturing facilities, which would require the incurrence of significant additional costs, delays, and materially adversely affect our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for, or market our product candidates, if approved. Similarly, our failure, or the failure of our CMOs, to comply with applicable regulations could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, license revocation, seizures or recalls of product candidates or drugs, operating restrictions, and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly and adversely affect supplies of our product candidates or drugs and harm our business and results of operations.

Moreover, our CMOs may experience manufacturing difficulties due to resource constraints, supply chain issues, or as a result of labor disputes or unstable political environments. If any CMOs on which we will rely fail to manufacture quantities of our product candidates at quality levels necessary to meet regulatory requirements and at a scale sufficient to meet anticipated demand at a cost that allows us to achieve profitability, our business, financial condition, and prospects could be materially and adversely affected. In addition, our CMOs are responsible for transporting temperature-controlled materials that can be inadvertently degraded during transport due to several factors, rendering certain batches unsuitable for trial use for failure to meet, among others, our integrity and purity specifications. We and any of our CMOs may also face product seizure or detention or refusal to permit the import or export of products. Our business could be materially adversely affected by business disruptions to our third-party providers that could materially adversely affect our anticipated timelines, potential future revenue and financial condition, and increase our costs and expenses. Each of these risks could delay or prevent the completion of our preclinical studies and clinical trials or the approval of any of our product candidates by the FDA, result in higher costs or adversely impact commercialization of our product candidates

We are a preclinical stage biotechnology company with a limited operating history, and, as of November 3, 2025, we had 41 full-time employees. We have been and will continue to be highly dependent on the research and development, clinical and business development expertise of our executive officers, as well as the other principal members of our management, scientific and clinical team. Any of our management team members may terminate their employment with us at any time. We do not maintain “key person” insurance for any of our executives or other employees.

Attracting and retaining qualified personnel will also be critical to our success, including with respect to any strategic transaction that we may pursue. The loss of the services of our executive officers or other key employees could impede the achievement of our research, development, and commercialization objectives and seriously harm our ability to successfully implement our business strategy. Furthermore, replacing executive officers and key employees may be difficult and may take an extended period of time because of the limited number of individuals in our industry with the breadth of skills and experience required to successfully develop, facilitate regulatory approval of, and commercialize product candidates. Competition to hire from this limited pool is intense, and we may be unable to hire, train, retain, or motivate these key personnel on acceptable terms given the competition among numerous pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for similar personnel. We also experience competition for the hiring of scientific and clinical personnel from universities and research institutions.

In addition, we rely on consultants and advisors, including scientific and clinical advisors, to assist us in formulating our discovery and nonclinical and clinical development and commercialization strategy. Our consultants and advisors may be employed by employers other than us and may have commitments under consulting or advisory contracts with other entities that may limit their availability to us. If we are unable to continue to attract and retain high quality personnel, our ability to pursue our growth strategy will be limited.

Our future growth may depend, in part, on our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates in foreign markets for which we may rely on collaboration with third parties. We are not permitted to market or promote any of our product candidates before we receive regulatory approval from the applicable foreign regulatory authority, and may never receive such regulatory approval for any of our product candidates. To obtain separate regulatory approval in many other countries, we must comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of such countries regarding safety and efficacy and governing, among other things, clinical trials and commercial sales, pricing and distribution of our product candidates, and we cannot predict success in these jurisdictions. If we fail to comply with the regulatory requirements in international markets and receive applicable regulatory and marketing approvals, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of our product candidates will be harmed and our business will be adversely affected. Moreover, even if we obtain approval of our product candidates and ultimately commercialize our product candidates in foreign markets, we would be subject to the risks and uncertainties, including the burden of complying with complex and changing foreign regulatory, tax, accounting, and legal requirements and reduced protection of intellectual property rights in some foreign countries.

We are exposed to the risk that our employees, independent contractors, consultants, commercial collaborators, principal investigators, CROs, CMOs, suppliers, and vendors acting for or on our behalf may engage in misconduct or other improper activities. We have adopted a code of conduct regarding the ethical standards to which each director, officer and employee should adhere while acting on behalf of Crescent, but it is not always possible to identify and deter misconduct by third parties and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with these laws or regulations.

Our internal information technology systems, or those of any of our CROs, manufacturers, other contractors or consultants, third-party service providers, or potential future collaborators, may fail or suffer security or data privacy breaches or other unauthorized or improper access to, use of, or destruction of our proprietary or confidential data, employee data, or personal data, which could result in additional costs, loss of revenue, significant liabilities, harm to our brand, and material disruption of our operations.

Certain members of our workforce are remote, which may create additional risks for our information technology systems and data because our employees who work remotely utilize network connections, computers, and devices working at home, while in transit and in public locations. Additionally, business transactions (such as acquisitions or integrations) could expose us to additional cybersecurity risks and vulnerabilities, as our systems could be negatively affected by vulnerabilities present in acquired or integrated entities’ systems and technologies.

While we have implemented security measures designed to protect against security incidents, there can be no assurance that these measures will be effective. We may be unable in the future to detect vulnerabilities in our information technology systems because such threats and techniques change frequently, are often sophisticated in nature, and may not be detected until after a security incident has occurred. Further, we may experience delays in developing and deploying remedial measures designed to address any such identified vulnerabilities. Applicable data privacy and security obligations may require us to notify relevant stakeholders of security incidents. Such disclosures are costly, and the disclosure or the failure to comply with such requirements could lead to adverse consequences.

If we (or a third party upon whom we rely) experiences a security incident or is perceived to have experienced a security incident, we may experience adverse consequences, such as government enforcement actions (for example, investigations, fines, penalties, audits, and inspections); additional reporting requirements and/or oversight; restrictions on processing sensitive information (including personal data); litigation (including class claims); indemnification obligations; negative publicity; reputational harm; monetary fund diversions; interruptions in our operations (including availability of data); financial loss; and other similar harms. Security incidents and attendant consequences may cause stakeholders (including investors and potential customers) to stop supporting our platform, deter new customers from products, and negatively impact our ability to grow and operate our business.

We and third parties who we work with are or may become subject to numerous domestic and foreign laws, regulations, and standards relating to privacy, data protection, and data security, the scope of which is changing, subject to differing applications and interpretations, and may be inconsistent among countries, or conflict with other rules. We are or may become subject to the terms of contractual obligations related to privacy, data protection, and data security. Our obligations may also change or expand as our business grows. The actual or perceived failure by us or third parties related to us to comply with such laws, regulations, and obligations could increase our compliance and operational costs, expose us to regulatory scrutiny, actions, fines, and penalties, result in reputational harm, lead to a loss of customers, result in litigation and liability, and otherwise cause a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

The rules dealing with U.S. federal, state, and local income taxation are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Treasury Department. Changes to tax laws (which may have retroactive application) could adversely affect our shareholders or us. We assess the impact of various tax reform proposals and modifications to existing tax treaties in all jurisdictions where we have operations to determine the potential effect on our business and any assumptions we have made about our future taxable income. We cannot predict whether any specific proposals will be enacted, the terms of any such proposals or what effect, if any, such proposals would have on our business if they were to be enacted. For example, the United States enacted the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (“IRA”), which implements, among other changes, a 1% excise tax on certain stock buybacks. In addition, beginning in 2022, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act eliminated the previously available option to deduct research and development expenditures and requires taxpayers to amortize them generally over five years for research activities conducted in the United States and over 15 years for research activities conducted outside the United States. On July 4, 2025, the U.S. Congress enacted the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which includes provisions that allow for the immediate expensing of domestic U.S. research and development expenses, a general requirement to reduce the deduction for research and development expense by any research credit taken, and other changes to the U.S. taxation of profits derived from foreign operations. The impact of this newly enacted law on our tax position will depend on how the provision is implemented and interpreted by the Internal Revenue Service and other regulatory authorities. In addition, we have no assurance as to whether, when and how this provision may be subject to further amendment or repeal. Such changes, among others, may adversely affect our effective tax rate, results of operation, and general business condition.

Our cash held in non-interest-bearing and interest-bearing accounts exceeds the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) 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. For example, the FDIC took control of Silicon Valley Bank on March 10, 2023. The Federal Reserve subsequently announced that account holders would be made whole. However, the FDIC may not make all account holders whole in the event of future bank failures. In addition, even if account holders are ultimately made whole with respect to a future bank failure, account holders’ access to their accounts and assets held in their accounts may be substantially delayed. Any material loss that we may experience in the future or inability for a material time period to access our cash could have an adverse effect on our ability to pay our operational expenses or make other payments, which could adversely affect our business.

General Risk Factors

Our revenue will be dependent, in part, upon the size of the markets in the territories for which we gain regulatory approval, the accepted price for the product, the ability to obtain coverage and reimbursement and whether we own the commercial rights for that territory. If the number of our addressable patients is not as significant as we estimate, the indication approved by regulatory authorities is narrower than we expect, or the treatment population is narrowed by competition, physician choice, or treatment guidelines, we may not generate significant revenue from sales of such products, even if approved.

From time to time we may be subject to litigation claims through the ordinary course of our business operations regarding, but not limited to, employment matters, security of patient and employee personal information, contractual relations with collaborators, and intellectual property rights. Litigation to defend ourself against claims by third parties, or to enforce any rights that we may have against third parties, may continue to be necessary, which could result in substantial costs and diversion of our resources, causing a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.

Our business could be adversely affected by economic downturns, inflation, increases in interest rates, natural disasters, public health crises, political crises, geopolitical events, or other macroeconomic conditions, which could have a material and adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

The global economy, including credit and financial markets, has experienced extreme volatility and disruptions, including, among other things, diminished liquidity and credit availability, declines in consumer confidence, declines in economic growth, supply chain shortages, increases in inflation rates, higher interest rates, and uncertainty about economic stability. Adverse macroeconomic conditions, including inflation, slower growth or recession, new or increased tariffs and other barriers to trade, especially in light of recent comments and executive orders made by the Trump Administration, changes to fiscal and monetary policy or government budget dynamics (particularly in the pharmaceutical and biotech areas), tighter credit, fluctuating interest rates, volatility in financial markets, high unemployment, labor availability constraints, currency fluctuations, and other challenges in the global economy have in the past adversely affected, and may in the future adversely affect, us and our business partners and suppliers. In 2025, the United States has announced reciprocal tariffs on a variety of countries and products, some of which have been implemented. There remains substantial uncertainty regarding future tariff rates and the countries and products to which such tariffs would apply. Historically, tariffs have led to increased trade and political tensions. In response to tariffs, other countries have implemented retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods. Political tensions as a result of trade policies could reduce trade volume, investment, technological exchange, and other economic activities between major international economies, resulting in a material adverse effect on global economic conditions and the stability of global financial markets. There is substantial uncertainty about the duration of existing tariffs and whether additional tariffs may be imposed, modified, or suspended. The Federal Reserve has raised interest rates multiple times in response to concerns about inflation and it may raise them again. Higher interest rates, coupled with reduced government spending and volatility in financial markets, may increase economic uncertainty and affect consumer spending. Similarly, the ongoing military conflict between Russia and Ukraine and in the Middle East and rising tensions with China have created extreme volatility in the global capital markets and may have further global economic consequences, including disruptions of the global supply chain. For example, trade policies and geopolitical disputes (including as a result of China-Taiwan relations) and other international conflicts can result in tariffs, sanctions, and other measures that restrict international trade, and can materially adversely affect our business, particularly if these measures occur in regions where we source our components or raw materials. In addition, tensions between the United States and China have led to a series of tariffs being imposed by the United States on imports from China mainland, as well as other business restrictions. Tariffs increase the costs of the components and raw materials we source. Countries may also adopt other measures, such as controls on imports or exports of goods, technology, or data, that could adversely impact our operations and supply chain. Any such volatility and disruptions may adversely affect our business or the third parties on whom we rely. If the equity and credit markets deteriorate, including as a result of political unrest or war, it may make any necessary debt or equity financing more costly, more dilutive, or more difficult to obtain in a timely manner or on favorable terms, if at all. Increased inflation rates can adversely affect us by increasing our costs, including labor and employee benefit costs.

Risks Related to Owning Our Ordinary Shares

Preferred directors elected by the holders of our Series A Preferred Shares have the ability to control or significantly influence all matters submitted to our board of directors for approval.

Pursuant to our Certificate of Designation of Preferences, Rights and Limitations of the Series A Non-Voting Convertible Preferred Shares (the “Series A Certificate of Designation”), at all times when at least 30% of the originally issued Series A Preferred Shares remains issued and outstanding: (i) the holders of our Series A Preferred Shares, exclusively and voting together as a separate class on an as-converted to ordinary shares basis, are entitled to elect two preferred directors (the “Preferred Directors”); and (ii) the holders of our ordinary shares and of any other class or series of voting shares (including our Series A Preferred Shares), exclusively and voting together as a single class on an as-converted to ordinary shares basis, are entitled to elect the balance of the total number of directors of our board. Each Preferred Director is entitled to three votes on each matter presented to our board of directors.

Following the completion of the Merger, Peter Harwin and Jonathan Violin were elected as the two Preferred Directors by the holders of our Series A Preferred Shares. These two directors, in the aggregate, have six votes on each matter presented to the board of directors, representing 60% of the total votes of the board. As a result, these two Preferred Directors are able to control or significantly influence all matters submitted to our board of directors for approval, including business plans and policies and the appointment and removal of our officers. The holders of our Series A Preferred Shares thereby have influence with respect to the composition of our board of directors and, to the extent they influence the actions of the Preferred Directors, if at all, actions of our board of directors. An affiliate of Fairmount is the sole holder of our Series A Preferred Shares. Mr. Harwin is a Managing Member at Fairmount, and Dr. Violin is a Venture Partner at Fairmount.

The decision to enter into or amend any Paragon Option Agreement (or similar agreements) or license agreement with Paragon is subject to the approval of our board of directors. As noted above, our board of directors includes two Preferred Directors that are affiliated with and elected by Fairmount. As a result, Fairmount may exert influence on the decisions of our board of directors and management, including as it relates to the Paragon Option Agreements and decisions to exercise options or enter into license agreements thereunder, which interests may differ from the interests of our shareholders given Fairmount’s interest in both us and Paragon, and indirect interest in Parascent. All directors of our board of directors owe fiduciary duties pursuant to Cayman Islands law, and are expected to comply with their respective fiduciary duties under Cayman Islands law relevant to related party transactions. In addition, we have adopted a related party transaction approval policy pursuant to which the Audit Committee of our board of directors is responsible for the review, consideration, and approval or ratification of related party transactions.

We are governed by Cayman Islands law, and certain provisions of our Articles of Association have anti-takeover implications.

Our organizational documents are governed by Cayman Islands law, and certain provisions in our Articles of Association may discourage, delay, or prevent a merger, acquisition, or other change in control of the company that shareholders may consider favorable, including transactions in which our ordinary shareholders might otherwise receive a premium price for their ordinary shares. These provisions could also limit the price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for our ordinary shares, thereby depressing the market price of our ordinary shares. In addition, because our board of directors is responsible for appointing the members of our management team, these provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempts by any shareholders to replace or remove our current management by making it more difficult for shareholders to replace members of our board of directors. Among other things, these provisions:

•provide for a classified board of directors such that not all members of our board of directors are elected at one time;

•allow the authorized number of directors to be changed only by resolution of our board of directors, subject to the terms of the Certificate of Designation of our Series A Preferred Shares (the “Certificate of Designation”);

•limit the manner in which shareholders can remove directors from our board of directors;

•limit who may call a general meeting of shareholders;

•authorize the board of directors to issue preferred shares without shareholder approval, which could be used to institute a “poison pill” that would work to dilute the share ownership of a potential hostile acquirer, effectively preventing acquisitions that have not been approved by our board of directors; and

•require a special resolution passed by the affirmative vote of not less than two-thirds of the votes cast at a general meeting to amend provisions of the Articles of Association.

In addition, the Certificate of Designation relating to our Series A Preferred Shares may delay or prevent a change in control. At any time while at least 30% of the originally issued Series A Preferred Shares remain issued and outstanding, we may not consummate a Fundamental Transaction (as defined in the Certificate of Designation) or any merger or consolidation with or into another entity or any share sale to, or other business combination in which our shareholders immediately before such transaction do not hold at least a majority of the share capital immediately after such transaction, without the affirmative vote of the Preferred Directors, acting together, or a simple majority of the then issued and outstanding Series A Preferred Shares. This provision of the Certificate of Designation may make it more difficult us to enter into any of the aforementioned transactions, even potential change of control transactions that could offer a premium over market value to the ordinary shareholders, as it would require the separate consent of the Preferred Directors, acting together, or a simple majority of the issued and outstanding Series A Preferred Shares.

Our Articles of Association designate the courts of the Cayman Islands as the sole and exclusive forum for certain types of actions and proceedings that may be initiated by our shareholders, which could limit your ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers or other employees.

Our Articles of Association provide that, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the courts of the Cayman Islands shall have exclusive jurisdiction over any claim or dispute arising out of or in connection with our Articles of Association or otherwise related in any way to each shareholder’s shareholding in us, including, but not limited to: (i) any derivative action or proceeding brought on behalf of us; (ii) any action asserting a claim of breach of any fiduciary or other duty owed by any of our current or former directors, officers or other employees to us or our shareholders; (iii) any action asserting a claim arising pursuant to any provision of the Companies Act or our Articles of Association; or (iv) any action asserting a claim against us governed by the internal affairs doctrine (as such concept is recognized under the laws of the United States of America) and that each shareholder irrevocably submits to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the Cayman Islands over all such claims or disputes. The forum selection provision in our Articles of Association does not apply to actions or suits brought to enforce any liability or duty created by the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or any claim for which the federal district courts of the United States of America are, as a matter of the laws of the United States of America, the sole and exclusive forum for determination of such a claim.

Our Articles of Association also provide that, without prejudice to any other rights or remedies that we may have, each of our shareholders acknowledges that damages alone would not be an adequate remedy for any breach of the selection of the courts of the Cayman Islands as exclusive forum and that accordingly we are entitled, without proof of special damages, to the remedies of injunction, specific performance, or other equitable relief for any threatened or actual breach of the selection of the courts of the Cayman Islands as exclusive forum.

This choice of forum provision may increase a shareholder’s cost and limit the shareholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers, or other employees, which may discourage lawsuits against us and our directors, officers, and other employees. Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring any of our shares or other securities, whether by transfer, sale, operation of law, or otherwise, shall be deemed to have notice of and have irrevocably agreed and consented to these provisions. There is uncertainty as to whether a court would enforce such provisions, and the enforceability of similar choice of forum provisions in other companies’ memorandum and articles of association or other charter documents has been challenged in legal proceedings. It is possible that a court could find this type of provisions to be inapplicable or unenforceable, and if a court were to find this provision in our Articles of Association to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving the dispute in other jurisdictions, which could have adverse effect on our business and financial performance.

Future sales of shares by existing shareholders could cause our share price to decline.

If our shareholders sell, or indicate an intention to sell, substantial amounts of our ordinary shares in the public market after legal restrictions on resale lapse, the trading price of our ordinary shares could decline. In addition, our ordinary shares that are subject to our outstanding options will become eligible for sale in the public market to the extent permitted by the provisions of various vesting agreements and Rules 144 and 701 under the Securities Act.

We do not anticipate that we will pay any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. The current expectation is that we will retain our future earnings, if any, to fund the development and growth of our business. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, of our ordinary shares will be your sole source of gain, if any, for the foreseeable future.

Our executive officers, directors, and principal shareholders have the ability to control or significantly influence all matters submitted to our shareholders for approval.

Our executive officers, directors, and principal shareholders beneficially own a significant percentage of our outstanding ordinary shares. As a result, if these shareholders were to choose to act together, they would be able to control or significantly influence all matters submitted to our shareholders for approval, as well as our management and affairs. For example, these shareholders, if they choose to act together, would control or significantly influence the election of directors and approval of any merger, consolidation, or sale of all or substantially all of our assets. This concentration of voting power could delay or prevent our acquisition on terms that other shareholders may desire.

If equity research analysts do not publish research or reports, or publish unfavorable research or reports about us, our business or our market, our share price and trading volume could decline.

The trading market for our ordinary shares will be influenced by the research and reports that equity research analysts publish about us and our business. Equity research analysts may elect to not provide research coverage of our ordinary shares, and such lack of research coverage may adversely affect the market price of our ordinary shares. If we do have equity research analyst coverage, we will not have any control over the analysts or the content and opinions included in their reports. The price of our ordinary shares could decline if one or more equity research analysts downgrade our shares or issue other unfavorable commentary or research. If one or more equity research analysts ceases coverage of us or fails to publish reports on us regularly, demand for our ordinary shares could decrease, which in turn could cause our share price or trading volume to decline.

Our ability to use Net Operating Loss (“NOL”) carryforwards and other tax attributes may be limited, including as a result of the Merger.

GlycoMimetics incurred losses during its history, and we do not expect to become profitable in the near future and may never achieve profitability. As of December 31, 2024, GlycoMimetics had NOL carryforwards of approximately $351.8 million, and approximately $10.9 million of research and development credits that may be used to offset future taxable income. GlycoMimetics had operating loss carryforwards of $351.8 million generated prior to 2018, which will expire beginning in 2025 if not utilized. Under current law, GlycoMimetics’ U.S. federal NOLs of $351.8 million incurred in tax years beginning after December 31, 2017 may be carried forward indefinitely, but the deductibility of such NOL carryforwards is limited to 80% of taxable income. It is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to federal law. In addition, under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the “Code”), U.S. federal NOL carryforwards and other tax attributes may become subject to an annual limitation in the event of certain cumulative changes in ownership. An “ownership change” pursuant to Section 382 of the Code generally occurs if one or more shareholders or groups of shareholders who own at least 5% of a company’s shares increase their ownership by more than 50 percentage points over their lowest ownership percentage within a rolling three-year period. Our ability to utilize our NOL carryforwards and other tax attributes to offset future taxable income or tax liabilities may be limited as a result of ownership changes. Similar rules may apply under state tax laws. If we earn taxable income, such limitations could result in increased future income tax liability to us, and our future cash flows could be adversely affected.