Cabaletta Bio, Inc.
For the period ended Dec 31, 2025. Filed Mar 23, 2026.
View on SEC.govAbout this filing
A company's yearly report to the SEC, with audited financial statements. It is the fullest account a company gives of its business, its finances and the risks it sees.
FY2025 · Filed Mar 23, 2026
CABA$1.50+15.4%Stored close · as of Nov 9, 2026
What changed in Risk Factors?
Read the current filingPrevious report: 10-K
Period ended 2024-12-31; filed 2025-03-31.
0000950170-25-047201
Item 1A. Risk FactorsCurrent report: 10-K
Period ended 2025-12-31; filed 2026-03-23.
0001759138-26-000011
Item 1A. Risk FactorsThe baseline is this issuer’s latest earlier reporting period of the same form that was filed before the current report. A previous 10-Q is a different quarter, not a year-over-year comparison. Amendments are excluded.
Compared 477 previous paragraphs and 510 current paragraphs.
384 unchanged; 81 reworded; 42 added; 7 removed; 5 previous and 3 current paragraphs rearranged.
Tables are not compared: 0 previous and 0 current tables excluded. Dates, whitespace, punctuation and numbering changes are ignored; changes to financial figures remain significant.
A changed paragraph is not evidence that risk increased or decreased. An unchanged paragraph does not establish that risk stayed the same.
Added paragraphs (42)
Current report
Our registrational trials may rely on a single-arm design and an external control; if regulatory authorities determine that the external control is unsuitable, we may be unable to obtain approval on our anticipated timelines, or at all.
Current report
We plan to conduct registrational trials using an open-label, single-arm design with an external comparator(s) rather than a blinded, randomized controlled trial. As a result, data generated from these studies may be subject to heightened FDA scrutiny regarding potential bias, confounding variables, and the overall reliability of treatment-effect estimates. In externally controlled trials, outcomes for patients who receive the investigational therapy according to the trial protocol are compared with outcomes from individuals who did not receive the investigational therapy and who are external to the trial. External controls may be historical (from an earlier time period) or concurrent (collected during the same time period in a different setting), and may be derived from real‑world data sources such as patient registries, electronic health records, or medical claims. For example, in our RESET-Myositis® program for rese-cel, we intend to conduct a single-arm registrational trial in patients with dermatomyositis or antisynthetase syndrome evaluating a 16-week primary endpoint—defined as achievement of a moderate or major Total Improvement Score while off immunomodulators and on no or low‑dose steroids—and we intend to rely on a retrospective analysis of a myositis patient registry to estimate control response rates.
Current report
Use of a registry dataset introduces risks, including whether the dataset is sufficiently comparable to our trial population and whether key clinical and demographic variables are assessed consistently. If the FDA disagrees with, or subsequently revises or withdraws its prior feedback regarding the suitability of our trial design, analytical methods, or the external control dataset, the FDA may require additional data, extended follow-up, alternative endpoints, or a randomized controlled trial. Any of these outcomes could substantially delay or prevent regulatory approval. The FDA has highlighted multiple risks associated with the use of external controls, including the potential for confounding and bias arising from, among other factors: temporal changes in standard of care; geographic differences in treatment practices or access to care; heterogeneity in diagnostic criteria; differences in prognostic indicators; variations in background therapies; differing clinical characteristics and responses to standard of care among patients with different disease subtypes; differing assessment schedules or endpoint definitions; missing data; and selection bias in the external dataset. The FDA also generally expects patient-level access to external datasets and robust, pre-specified statistical analysis plans. Even with such plans, as well as propensity methods and sensitivity analyses, these approaches may insufficiently mitigate confounding and bias in the view of the FDA.
Current report
If our external control dataset, its pre-specification, or our planned analyses are viewed as inadequate, the FDA may determine that our single-arm registrational trial does not constitute an “adequate and well‑controlled” investigation under applicable regulations, and may make such determination even where we believe that we have previously aligned with the FDA on the design of the registrational trial. The FDA may also determine that any patient registry we use—including the myositis registry supporting our RESET-Myositis® cohort—is unsuitable as an external control. In March 2026, FDA noted that concerns with the use of a registry include potential differences between the enrolled study population and registry population for the RESET-Myositis® cohort (e.g. diagnosis classification and refractory definition) and missing data as well as other criteria established by FDA guidance for industry, and that such details are needed in order to assess suitability of the proposed registry as an external control. In addition, FDA has recently issued Complete Response Letters or changed its feedback to sponsors in pre-BLA meetings citing concerns with external controls such as potential bias and design flaws, including eligibility criteria, endpoints, and timing of assessments not being closely aligned between trial population and the external dataset. If the FDA reaches similar conclusions in our case, it could reject our comparative analyses, request confirmatory data, or require a randomized trial, resulting in significant delays, increased costs, or failure to obtain approval.
Current report
Even if our clinical data and statistical analyses comparing our data to an external control—such as a myositis registry—demonstrate favorable evidence of the investigational candidate’s effectiveness, the FDA may still determine that such evidence is insufficient to support approval. This could occur for a variety of reasons, including unfavorable interpretation of comparative analyses, perceived differences between the clinical and external datasets, questions regarding the adequacy of our sensitivity analyses, or concerns about the absence of additional control sources.
Current report
There are also geopolitical tensions with China. For example, in December, 2025, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026, or the NDAA, was enacted, which includes Section 851, commonly referred to as the “BIOSECURE Act.” The BIOSECURE Act restricts U.S. government agencies from procuring biotechnology equipment or services from, or entering into contracts with, entities that use biotechnology equipment or services from, designated “biotechnology companies of concern”, or BCCs, and from expending federal loan or grant funds for such equipment or services. If our current or future vendors with which we work are designated as BCCs in the future, or if our collaborators, customers, investors, or future commercial partners become subject to BIOSECURE-related restrictions as a result of their relationships with such vendors, we could be required to terminate or restructure existing arrangements, transition manufacturing or other services to alternative suppliers, or delay or suspend development activities, subject to a grace period of 5 years during which time a company could continue to work with such restricted vendor. Any such transition could involve significant cost, operational complexity, regulatory risk, and delays, and alternative suppliers may not be available on acceptable terms or at all.
Current report
Subsequently, we issued (i) 39,200,000 shares of our common stock and accompanying warrants to purchase an aggregate of 39,200,000 shares of common stock (or pre-funded warrants in lieu thereof) and (ii) in lieu of common stock, to certain investors, pre-funded warrants to purchase an aggregate of up to 10,800,000 shares of our common stock and accompanying warrants to purchase an aggregate of 10,800,000 shares of common stock (or pre-funded warrants in lieu thereof), at an exercise price of $0.00001 per pre-funded warrant, or the 2025 Offering. The combined offering price of each share of common stock and accompanying common stock warrant was $2.00. The combined offering price of each pre-funded warrant and accompanying common stock warrant was $1.99999. The accompanying warrant has an exercise price of $2.50 per share, is immediately exercisable from the date of issuance and will expire on September 12, 2026, fifteen months from the date of issuance. Aggregate net proceeds were $93.6 million after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses. As a result of this offering, our stockholders experienced significant dilution. Sales of common stock, debt securities or other equity securities by us may represent a significant percentage of our common stock currently outstanding. If we sell, or the market perceives that we intend to sell, substantial number of additional shares of our common stock under the 2025 Registration Statement or otherwise, the market price of our common stock could decline significantly.
Current report
In addition, as of December 31, 2025, we had outstanding 53,090,190 common stock warrants and pre-funded warrants to purchase 6,000,000 shares of our common stock. If some or all of these warrants are exercised, our stockholders could experience substantial dilution and may cause the market price of our stock to decline.
Current report
Future issuances of our common stock or other equity securities, or the perception that sales of this nature may occur, could adversely affect the trading price of our common stock, and impair our ability to raise capital through future offerings of shares or equity securities. No prediction can be made as to the effect, if any, that future sales of common stock or the availability of common stock for future sales will have on the trading price of our common stock.
Current report
Our outstanding common stock warrants may not be exercised, and we may not receive any additional funds upon the exercise of such warrants.
Current report
As of December 31, 2025, we had outstanding 53,090,190 common stock warrants. If all common stock warrants were exercised for cash, we would receive approximately an additional $132 million in gross proceeds from the 2025 Offering. However, the warrant holders are not obligated to exercise these warrants, so we may receive little to no additional proceeds. Our common stock warrants have an exercise price of $2.50 per share and are exercisable at any time after the date of issuance. The common stock warrants expire on September 12, 2026, fifteen months from the date of issuance. Warrant holders are unlikely to exercise their warrants voluntarily unless our stock price is above the exercise price. We cannot provide any assurance that our stock price will meaningfully exceed the exercise price before the warrants expire. If our stock price remains at or below the exercise price, the warrants will likely expire unexercised, and we will not receive any additional funds from these warrants to support our clinical trials and operations.
Current report
In addition, the common stock warrants may be exercised on a cashless basis if there is no effective registration statement registering the shares underlying such warrants, in which case we would not receive any additional proceeds. Though we intend to maintain an effective registration statement for the underlying shares, we may not be able to do so. If the common stock warrants are not exercised for cash, or only a portion of the common stock warrants are exercised for cash, we would not receive anticipated warrant exercise proceeds which could materially and adversely affect our financial condition and ability to execute our business strategy.
Current report
We will not receive any meaningful amount of additional funds upon the exercise of the pre-funded warrants; however, any exercise would increase the number of shares of our common stock eligible for future resale in the public market and result in dilution to our stockholders.
Current report
In the 2025 Offering, we issued and sold pre-funded warrants to purchase up to 10,800,000 shares of our common stock. As of December 31, 2025, 4,800,000 pre-funded warrants had been exercised and 6,000,000 remain outstanding. Each pre-funded warrant is exercisable until it is fully exercised and by means of payment of the nominal cash purchase price upon exercise or by means of a “cashless exercise” according to a formula set forth in the pre-funded warrant. Accordingly, we will not receive any meaningful additional funds upon the exercise of the pre-funded warrants. To the extent such pre-funded warrants are exercised, additional shares of common stock will be issued for nominal or no additional consideration, which will result in dilution to the then existing holders of our common stock and will increase the number of shares eligible for resale in the public market.
Current report
our diligence obligations with respect to the use of the licensed technology in relation to our development and commercialization of our product candidate, and what activities satisfy those diligence obligations; and
Current report
There have been, and may continue to be, significant changes to U.S. trade policies, sanctions, legislation, treaties and tariffs, including, but not limited to, trade policies and tariffs affecting products from outside of the U.S. The extent and duration of increased tariffs and the resulting impact on general economic conditions and on our business are uncertain and depend on various factors, such as negotiations between the U.S. and affected countries, the responses of other countries or regions, exemptions or exclusions that may be granted, availability and cost of alternative sources of supply and demand in affected markets. Supply chain disruptions and delays as a result of any new tariff policies or trade restrictions could negatively impact our cost of materials processes. If we or our current or future service providers, manufacturers and other partners are unable to obtain materials in sufficient quantity and in a timely manner due to disruptions in the global supply chain caused by macroeconomic events and conditions, the development, testing and our clinical trials and any future product candidates may be delayed or infeasible, and regulatory approval or commercial launch of any resulting product may be delayed or not obtained, which could significantly harm our business.
Current report
The Lonza Agreement has an initial five year term with the ability to extend subject to the terms. Under the Lonza Agreement, Lonza will serve as one of our manufacturing partners for the global clinical development of rese-cel in multiple indications, including potential late-stage clinical trials and preparations for commercial readiness. Lonza has the right to terminate the Lonza Agreement in whole at any time with written notice including a three month ramp down period. If Lonza were to fail to perform their obligations in accordance with the terms of the Lonza Agreement or terminate the Lonza Agreement, our clinical trials and commercial readiness may be adversely impacted which could in turn materially and adversely affect our business, results of operations and prospects.
Current report
Changes in manufacturers or manufacturing processes for rese‑cel, including process optimization and scale‑up for commercial production, present significant risks. If we cannot establish comparability, validate our processes and methods (including for critical materials such as lentiviral vector), and/or if our CMO(s) fails pre-approval inspection, the initiation or completion of pivotal studies, regulatory approval and commercialization could be delayed or prevented.
Current report
Cell therapy products like rese-cel are complex and sensitive to changes in materials, equipment, sites, and processes. The physical and chemical properties of cell therapies such rese-cel generally cannot be fully characterized, and regulators expect robust process controls and phase-appropriate but maturing analytical methods to assure identity, quality, purity, and strength. As a result, assays of the finished product may not be sufficient to ensure that the product will perform in the intended manner. Accordingly, we employ multiple steps to control our manufacturing process to assure that the product candidate is made strictly and consistently in compliance with the applicable quality standards. We may encounter problems achieving adequate quantities and quality of clinical materials that meet FDA, or other applicable foreign standards or specifications. Manufacturing deviations or seemingly minor process changes can alter critical quality attributes, leading to lot failures, supply interruptions, or additional investigations, any of which can delay clinical timelines or regulatory submissions.
Current report
Challenges complying with cGMP requirements and other quality issues could arise during efforts to increase manufacturing capacity, optimize manufacturing and scale up production. In addition, in order to obtain regulatory approval of our product candidates (and in order to release our products for commercial use), our manufacturing processes and analytical methods, including with respect to certain raw materials used in the manufacturing of our product candidates, such as lentiviral vector, must be validated in accordance with regulatory guidelines. Failure to successfully validate, or maintain validated state of our manufacturing processes and analytical methods for the product candidates or certain raw materials used in the manufacturing of our product candidates, such as lentiviral vector, in a timely or cost-effective manner, or at all, may undermine our clinical development timelines or delay, or prevent, our ability to obtain regulatory approval of our product candidates. Any process performance qualification (PPQ) campaign for rese-cel must show that the commercial process can consistently produce product meeting predefined specifications under normal variability, including variability of critical materials such as lentiviral vector (LVV). Regulators may question PPQ approaches that rely on limited or single lots of critical inputs to establish consistency, and may expect a risk assessment, process characterization, and evidence that input material specifications are representative of intended commercial supply. If our PPQ design or results are deemed insufficient, we could be required to perform additional PPQ runs, repeat validation activities, adjust specifications, or conduct further studies, which could be costly and delay our BLA or other regulatory approval.
Current report
Lentiviral vector, or LVV, is a critical manufacturing input for CAR T-cell products. FDA guidance highlights expectations for vector manufacturing and testing, including identity, purity, functional (e.g., potency-related) characteristics, and safety testing. Regulators also emphasize having an appropriately qualified potency strategy in place as development progresses, and they may expect potency-relevant assays for critical components used to support pivotal study supplies, or, if not available at the time of manufacture, a risk-based justification with follow-up testing. Challenges in qualifying or validating vector-related assays, securing vector supply, or meeting evolving specifications could delay batch release, clinical milestones, or approval.
Current report
Transferring processes, methods, and know-how to a new manufacturers or manufacturing site is complex and time-consuming, may necessitate method bridging/transfer, and can introduce site-specific changes in equipment, raw materials, or procedures. As is customary, we have been, and may continue, optimizing and scaling manufacturing for later-stage development and potential commercialization, and we have transferred, and may in the future transfer, manufacturing to one or more contract manufacturers or additional manufacturing sites. Regulators expect sponsors to demonstrate comparability—analytically, and when needed via nonclinical or clinical bridging—between products made before and after process changes and across manufacturing sites. If our manufacturers fail to demonstrate adequate comparability on the expected timelines and at the required quality, and/or if FDA or other applicable foreign regulators do not agree with our proposed plans for demonstrating the comparability of the two processes, it may require us to incur additional costs or delay initiation or completion of clinical trials, complete additional pre-clinical studies and/or clinical trials, develop additional assays, or modify release specifications, and/or could delay or prohibit regulatory approval, including regulatory approval of certain manufacturing sites or processes.
Current report
Reliance on third parties for manufacture of our product candidates and raw materials utilized in manufacturing our product candidates entails certain risks, including reliance on the third party for regulatory compliance and quality assurance, the possibility that the third-party manufacturer does not maintain the financial, personnel or other resources to meet its obligations, the possibility that the third party fails to manufacture such components, or our product candidates or any products we may eventually commercialize, in accordance with our specifications, misappropriation of our proprietary information, including our trade secrets and know-how, and the possibility of termination of our manufacturing relationship by the third party, based on its own business priorities, at a time that is costly or damaging to us. In addition, the FDA and other regulatory authorities require that our product candidates and any products that we may eventually commercialize be manufactured according to cGMP and similar jurisdictional standards. These requirements include, among other things, quality control, quality assurance and the maintenance of records and documentation. The FDA or similar foreign regulatory agencies may also implement new standards at any time, or change their interpretations and enforcement of existing standards for manufacture, packaging or testing of products. We have little control over our manufacturers’ compliance with these regulations and standards.
Current report
In some cases, the technical skills required to manufacture our product candidates may be unique or proprietary to a particular CMO, and we may have difficulty, or there may be contractual restrictions prohibiting us from transferring such skills to a back-up or alternate supplier if needed, or we may be unable to transfer such skills at all.
Current report
Disruptions at the FDA, the USPTO, the SEC and other government agencies, including from government shutdowns, or other disruptions to these agencies’ operations, could hinder their ability to hire and retain key leadership and other personnel, prevent new products and services from being developed or commercialized in a timely manner or otherwise prevent those agencies from performing normal business functions on which the operation of our business may rely, which could negatively impact our business.
Current report
A primary trend in the U.S. healthcare industry and elsewhere is cost containment. For instance, multiple executive actions in the first half of 2025 signal the federal government’s increasing focus on lowering prescription drug prices, adding to the uncertainty surrounding future drug pricing and reimbursement frameworks. For example:
Current report
On May 12, 2025, President Trump signed the executive order titled “Delivering Most-Favored-Nation Prescription Drug Pricing,” which directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to identify and communicate most-favored-nation (MFN) price targets for prescription drugs and to propose a rulemaking plan to impose such pricing if “significant progress” is not made. The order also directs the federal government to explore regulatory pathways that would facilitate direct-to-patient sales for manufacturers that meet these price targets. Additionally, it signals potential further action against manufacturers that fail to offer MFN pricing, including evaluating whether to modify or rescind marketing approvals or allow individual drug importation waivers. Notably, a similar rule promulgated during
Current report
President Trump’s first term would have tied Medicare Part B reimbursement rates to the lowest price available for a drug in certain foreign countries. That rule was subject to litigation and ultimately rescinded by the Biden Administration in August 2021. In a related development, FDA Commissioner Makary announced in July 2025 that the agency is considering a new fast-track priority review voucher program for manufacturers that commit to pricing drugs in line with those in economically comparable countries. The implementation timeline and commercial implications of these proposals remain uncertain.
Current report
On April 15, 2025, President Trump issued the executive order “Lowering Drug Prices by Once Again Putting Americans First,” which contains a broad set of directives aimed at reducing drug costs. Among other actions, the order directs HHS to revise guidance under the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) to eliminate the so-called “pill penalty,” which currently subjects small molecule drugs to Medicare price negotiation four years earlier than biologics. The order also calls for a comprehensive evaluation of the role played by pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs, in drug pricing and market access.
Current report
Further, the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program, administered by CMS as part of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, commonly referred to as the IRA, may apply to our products if they are selected for negotiation, which could materially reduce the amount of revenue we can generate from our products if they are approved. Prior to the enactment of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025, or the OBBBA, orphan drugs were exempt from Medicare price negotiation under the IRA only if they had received a single orphan designation and were approved solely for the corresponding rare disease or condition. The OBBBA amended this exemption to apply more broadly: now, any orphan-designated drug is exempt from price negotiation, regardless of the number of orphan designations it has received, provided the drug’s approved indications are exclusively for those rare diseases. The OBBBA also included significant reforms to Medicaid, including an estimated $1 trillion in reduced federal Medicaid spending from 2025 through 2034, the imposition of work requirements for certain adult enrollees, more frequent eligibility redeterminations, and increased cost-sharing for beneficiaries. These changes are expected to reduce overall Medicaid enrollment and access to care. Although the effect on our future product candidates or business is unknown, any decrease in the number of insured patients or reimbursement levels for our products could adversely affect our potential for revenue and our commercial prospects.
Current report
On December 19, 2025, CMS released two proposed rules that would incorporate MFN pricing principles into federal reimbursement for prescription drugs. The first proposal, the Global Benchmark for Efficient Drug Pricing Model, or GLOBE, for Medicare Part B, would require manufacturers of specified single source drugs and sole source biologics to pay incremental rebates based on international benchmark prices, with participation triggered for products meeting CMS’s spending and eligibility criteria. The second proposal, the Guarding U.S. Medicare Against Rising Drug Costs, or GUARD, model for Medicare Part D, would similarly mandate manufacturer rebates for qualifying sole source drugs where the Medicare net price exceeds an MFN benchmark derived from international reference pricing methodologies. As proposed, GLOBE would begin a five year performance period on October 1, 2026 and GUARD would begin its performance period in 2027. These proposals will likely be subject to legal challenges that could delay their implementation or modify their impact on manufacturer pricing and revenue. Additionally, in November 2025, CMS introduced the GENErating cost Reductions for U.S. Medicaid Model, or GENEROUS Model, a voluntary MFN framework for manufacturers participating in the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program. Although it is voluntary, the GENEROUS Model could also impact the drug pricing landscape for manufacturers.
Current report
We expect that the healthcare reform measures that have been adopted and may be adopted in the future, may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product and could seriously harm our future revenues. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our products.
Current report
Despite Brexit, the UK and EEA data protection regimes remain largely aligned. However, going forward, there is increasing risk for divergence in application, interpretation and enforcement of the data protection laws as between the UK and EEA, creating additional regulatory uncertainty. For example, the UK Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 (“UK Act”), now in force, further differentiates the UK’s data protection regime. In December 2025, the European Commission adopted a decision determining that the UK continues to provide a level of data protection that is “essentially equivalent” to the EU standards and extended the validity of the UK adequacy decision for six years, through December 2031. While this renewal reduces immediate adequacy concerns, uncertainty remains regarding how UK data protection laws will evolve in the medium to longer term. The lack of clarity on future UK laws and regulations and their interaction with EU laws and regulations may affect our efforts to maintain a harmonized approach to processing European personal data and expose us to two parallel regimes where the UK GDPR and EU GDPR both apply with differing interpretation and enforcement approaches. This could increase our legal risk, uncertainty, complexity and compliance cost associated with the handling of European personal data, and may require us to adapt our privacy and data security compliance programs to account for legal and regulatory divergence between the UK and EEA.
Current report
At the federal level, failing to take appropriate steps to keep consumers’ personal information secure constitutes unfair acts or practices in or affecting commerce in violation of Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (“FTC Act”). The FTC’s current guidance for appropriately securing consumers’ personal information is similar to what is required by the HIPAA security regulations, but this guidance may change in the future, resulting in increased complexity and the need to expend additional resources to ensure we are complying with the FTC Act. Moreover, regulators and legislators are increasingly scrutinizing and restricting certain personal data transfers and transactions involving foreign countries. For example, the Department of Justice’s January 8, 2025, rule on “Preventing Access to U.S. Sensitive Personal Data and Government-Related Data by Countries of Concern or Covered Persons,” prohibits data brokerage transactions involving certain sensitive personal data categories, including health data, genetic data, and biospecimens, to countries of concern, including China. The regulations also restrict certain investment agreements, employment agreements and vendor agreements involving such data and countries of concern, absent specified cybersecurity controls. Similar state laws regulating health and genetic data and public procurement may also restrict transfers of data to, or partnerships with entities, outside the U.S. Actual or alleged violations of these regulations may be punishable by criminal and/or civil sanctions and may result in exclusion from participation in federal and state programs.
Current report
We may use and integrate artificial intelligence (AI) into our business processes both in our own development and implementation of AI and through the adoption of commercially available tools. Use of this technology could pose cybersecurity, data privacy, IT, intellectual property, regulatory, legal, operational, competitive, reputational and other risks and challenges that could affect our business. Specifically, risks related to accuracy, bias, AI hallucinations, discrimination, harmful content, misinformation, fraud, scams, targeted attacks (including model poisoning or data poisoning), surveillance, data leakage, inequality, environmental harms, and other harms may flow from our development, use, or deployment of AI technologies.
Current report
The rapid evolution of AI will require the application of significant resources to design, develop, test and maintain such systems to help ensure that AI is implemented in accordance with applicable law and regulation and in a socially responsible manner and to minimize any real or perceived unintended harmful impacts. If we enable or offer solutions that draw controversy due to perceived or actual negative societal impact, we may experience brand or reputational harm, competitive harm or legal liability. Additionally, the use of certain AI technology can give rise to intellectual property risks, including by disclosing or otherwise compromising our confidential or proprietary intellectual property and intellectual property infringement, or by undermining our ability to assert or defend ownership rights in intellectual property created with the assistance of AI tools.
Current report
Moreover, a growing number of legislators and regulators are adopting laws and regulations and have focused enforcement efforts on the adoption of AI and use of such technologies in compliance with ethical standards and societal expectations. These developments may increase our compliance burden and costs in connection with use of AI and lead to legal liability if we fail to meet evolving legal standards or if use of such technologies results in harms or other causes of action we did not predict. For example, the EU began implementing the Artificial Intelligence Act, or AI Act, on August 1, 2024, with a significant part of the law scheduled to come into effect in August 2026. As currently enacted, the AI Act, which may be amended as part of the EU’s Digital Omnibus, imposes significant obligations on providers and deployers of high-risk AI systems, and encourages providers and deployers of AI systems to account for EU ethical principles in their development and use of these systems. The scope of requirements depends on judicial interpretations and forthcoming legislative amendments, and non-compliance can lead to significant fines.
Current report
In the U.S., the AI regulatory environment is complex and uncertain. Over the past year, states have advanced, and in some cases passed, dozens of laws focusing on AI governance and regulation, including on deployment of AI in healthcare settings. At the federal level, the FDA has advanced guidance and proposed frameworks for regulating AI in drug discovery, marketing submissions, and medical device development. At the same time, the Trump Administration has endorsed a federal moratorium on the enforcement of state AI laws, including through a December 11, 2025, executive order on “Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence.” So far, these efforts have not been successful at curtailing state action on AI regulation, contributing to a complicated legislative patchwork, which may be litigated in state and federal courts. If we develop or use AI systems that are governed by the these laws or regulations, we will need to meet higher standards of data quality, transparency, and human oversight, and we would need to adhere to specific and potentially burdensome and costly ethical, accountability, and administrative requirements. We may also be subject to significant enforcement or litigation in the event of any perceived non-compliance.
Current report
The rapid evolution of AI will require the application of significant resources to design, develop, test and maintain our products and services to help ensure that AI is implemented in accordance with applicable law and regulation and in a socially responsible manner and to minimize any real or perceived unintended harmful impacts. Our vendors may in turn incorporate AI tools into their offerings, and the providers of these AI tools may not meet existing or rapidly evolving regulatory or industry standards, including with respect to privacy and data security. Any of these effects could damage our reputation, result in the loss of valuable property and information, cause us to breach applicable laws and regulations, and adversely impact our business. Bad actors around the world also use increasingly sophisticated methods, including the use of AI, to engage in illegal activities involving the theft and misuse of personal information, confidential information and intellectual property. In addition, the use of generative AI models in our internal or third-party systems may create new attack surfaces or methods for adversaries, which could impact us and our vendors. Any of these effects could damage our reputation, result in the loss of valuable property and information, cause us to breach applicable laws and regulations, and adversely impact our business.
Current report
publication of news reports about us or our industry;
Showing the first 40 of 42 passages. Open the source sections for the rest.
Removed paragraphs (7)
Previous report
limitations on our recourse in our CRO relationship with Penn as compared to a CRO that is not an academic institution;
Previous report
There are also current geopolitical tensions with China. Recently, the Biden administration signed multiple executive orders regarding China. One particular executive order titled Advancing Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing Innovation for a Sustainable, Safe, and Secure American Bioeconomy signed on September 12, 2022 will likely impact the pharmaceutical industry to encourage U.S. domestic manufacturing of pharmaceutical products. Moreover, there have been Congressional legislative proposals, such as the bill titled the BIOSECURE Act, which would, among other things, prohibit U.S. federal funding in connection with biotechnology equipment or services produced or provided by certain named Chinese “biotechnology companies of concern” (which, under the version of legislation passed by the U.S. House of Representatives on September 9, 2024, are WuXi AppTec, WuXi Biologics, MGI, BGI, and Complete Genomics) and loans and grants to, and federal contracts with any entity that uses biotechnology equipment or services from one of these entities in performance of the government contract, grant, or loan. The legislation also gives the federal government the authority to name additional “biotechnology companies of concern” that are engaged in research activities with the Chinese government and that pose a risk of U.S. national security. Previously, on May 15, 2024, the House Committee on Oversight and Accountability approved an updated version of the BIOSECURE Act which would delay the application of the BIOSECURE Act’s provisions (1) until January 1, 2032, with respect to biotechnology equipment and services provided or produced by a named biotechnology company of concern under a contract or agreement entered before the effective date of the legislation and (2) for a period of 5 years after the identification of new biotechnology companies of concern, with respect to biotechnology equipment and services provided or produced by an entity that the government identifies in the future as a biotechnology company of concern. On December 23, 2024, WuXi AppTec, parent company of WuXi, announced that it entered into a definitive agreement to sell the US and UK based operations of WuXi to Altaris, LLC, a healthcare investment firm headquartered in New York, and expected the transaction to close in the first half of 2025. On February 28, 2024, President Biden signed Executive Order 14117 (“Preventing Access to Americans' Bulk Sensitive Personal Data and United States Government-Related Data by Countries of Concern”) which implements a new framework to protect the privacy of personal data shared between the U.S. and Europe, which may, in effect, impact privacy laws with “countries of concern” such as China or Russia.
Previous report
others may independently develop similar or alternative technologies or duplicate any of our technologies without infringing our licensed intellectual property rights;
Previous report
We currently rely on certain foreign or foreign-owned third-party vendors, including WuXi, to manufacture certain clinical materials or to provide services in connection with certain clinical trials. Such foreign and foreign-owned vendors may be subject to U.S. legislation or investigations, including legislation similar to the previously proposed BIOSECURE Act, sanctions, 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, delay or impact clinical trials, have an adverse effect on our ability to secure significant commitments from governments to purchase our potential therapies and could adversely affect our financial condition and business prospects. In connection with WuXi, on December 23, 2024, WuXi AppTec, parent company of WuXi, announced that it entered into a definitive agreement to sell the US and UK based operations of WuXi to Altaris, LLC, a healthcare investment firm headquartered in New York, and expects that the transaction to close in the first half of 2025.
Previous report
On November 28, 2023, the FDA issued a safety communication to provide information about reports of T-cell malignancy following BCMA-directed or CD19-directed autologous CAR T cell immunotherapies and subsequently initiated class safety labeling changes for the approved products in this class. B However, all currently approved CAR T-cell immunotherapies are in oncology indications, and the autoimmune diseases we are seeking to treat with rese-cel, a CD19-directed CAR T immunotherapy, are different indications from the approved oncology indications. Accordingly, the FDA and other regulatory authorities may apply a different benefit-risk assessment threshold such that even if our product candidate demonstrated a similar safety profile as current CAR T therapies, the FDA could ultimately determine that the harmful side effects outweigh the benefits and require us to cease clinical trials or deny approval of our product candidates. The FDA’s investigation may impact the FDA’s review of product candidates that we are developing, or that we may seek to develop in the future, which may, among other things, result in additional regulatory scrutiny of our product candidates, delay the timing for receiving any regulatory approvals or impose additional post-approval requirements on any of our product candidates that receive regulatory approval.
Previous report
Although the UK is regarded as a third country under the EU GDPR, the European Commission has issued a decision recognizing the UK as providing adequate protection under the EU GDPR, or the Adequacy Decision, and, therefore, transfers of personal data originating in the EEA to the UK remain unrestricted. The UK government has confirmed that personal data transfers from the UK to the EEA remain free flowing. The UK Government had introduced a Data Protection and Digital Information Bill which failed in the UK legislative process. The UK Government introduced the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill which failed in the UK legislative process. A new Data (Use and Access) Bill (“UK Bill”) has now been introduced into parliament. The aim of the UK Bill is to reform the UK’s data protection regime. If passed, the final version of the UK Bill may have the effect of further altering the similarities between the UK and EEA data protection regime. This may lead to additional compliance costs and could increase our overall risk. The respective provisions and enforcement of the EU GDPR and UK GDPR may further diverge in the future and create additional regulatory challenges and uncertainties.
Previous report
Our ability to utilize our net operating losses and certain other tax attributes to offset future taxable income may be subject to certain limitations.
Reworded paragraphs (81)
Previous wording
In addition, we do not know the doses to be evaluated in pivotal trials or, if licensed, commercially. Finding a suitable dose may delay our anticipated clinical development timelines, and we may elect to pause clinical trials to find a suitable dose or make assessments ahead of continuing a trial. Our expectations with regard to our scalability and costs of manufacturing may vary significantly as we develop our product candidates and understand these critical factors. We may experience delays in developing a sustainable, reproducible and scalable manufacturing process or transferring that process to commercial partners, which may prevent us from completing our clinical studies or commercializing our product candidates on a timely or profitable basis, if at all.
Current wording
In addition, for certain RESETTM trials, we do not know the doses to be evaluated in pivotal trials or, if licensed, commercially. Finding a suitable dose may delay our anticipated clinical development timelines, and we may elect to pause clinical trials to find a suitable dose or make assessments ahead of continuing a trial. Our expectations with regard to our scalability and costs of manufacturing may vary significantly as we develop our product candidates and understand these critical factors. We may experience delays in developing a sustainable, reproducible and scalable manufacturing process or transferring that process to commercial partners, which may prevent us from completing our clinical studies or commercializing our product candidates on a timely or profitable basis, if at all.
Previous wording
Moreover, our product candidates may not perform successfully in clinical trials or may be associated with adverse events that distinguish them from the CAR T therapies that have previously been licensed. For instance, subjects in our CAAR T clinical trials will be infused with our proposed therapies, and may possess strongly activating soluble antibodies, which are not present in oncology patients, and when they interact with our infused product candidates, could result in potential adverse side effects, such as CRS or ICANS. Additionally, adverse side effects caused by even one of our CAR T or CAAR T product candidates could negatively affect our ability to develop future product candidates based on our CABA® platform. Unexpected side effects or clinical outcomes from any of our products candidates would significantly impact our business.
Current wording
Moreover, our product candidates may not perform successfully in clinical trials or may be associated with adverse events that distinguish them from the CAR T therapies that have previously been licensed. For instance, subjects in our CAAR T clinical trials have been infused with our proposed therapies, and may possess strongly activating soluble antibodies, which are not present in oncology patients, and when they interact with our infused product candidates, could result in potential adverse side effects, such as CRS or ICANS, which have been observed in our clinical trials. Additionally, adverse side effects caused by even one of our CAR T or CAAR T product candidates could negatively affect our ability to develop future product candidates based on our CABA® platform. Unexpected side effects or clinical outcomes from any of our products candidates would significantly impact our business.
Previous wording
Our product candidates are CAR T or CAAR T cell-based immunotherapies. In our clinical trials and other similarly designed cellular immunotherapies to treat cancer, there have been life threatening events related to ICANS and CRS requiring intense medical intervention, such as intubation or medications to support blood pressure, and in several cases, resulted in death. We have observed events of CRS and ICANS in our ongoing rese-cel REstoring SElf-Tolerance, or RESETTM, trial. ICANS is a condition that is currently defined clinically by cerebral edema, confusion, drowsiness, speech impairment, tremors, seizures or other central nervous system side effects, when such side effects are serious enough to lead to intensive care. CRS is a condition that is currently defined clinically by certain symptoms related to the release of cytokines, which can include fever, chills and low blood pressure, when such side effects are serious enough to lead to intensive care with mechanical ventilation or significant medications to support blood pressure. There is a possibility that our product candidates could have similarly life threatening serious adverse side effects, such as ICANS and CRS.
Current wording
Our product candidates are CAR T or CAAR T cell-based immunotherapies. In our clinical trials and clinical trials of other similarly designed cellular immunotherapies to treat cancer, there have been life threatening events related to ICANS and/or CRS requiring intense medical intervention, such as intubation or medications to support blood pressure, and in several cases in clinical trials of other similarly situated clinical trials and of other similarly designed immunotherapies to treat cancer resulted in death. We have observed events of CRS and ICANS in our ongoing rese-cel REstoring SElf-Tolerance, or RESET, trial. ICANS is a condition that is currently defined clinically by cerebral edema, confusion, drowsiness, speech impairment, tremors, seizures or other central nervous system side effects, when such side effects are serious enough to lead to intensive care. CRS is a condition that is currently defined clinically by certain symptoms related to the release of cytokines, which can include fever, chills and low blood pressure, when such side effects are serious enough to lead to intensive care with mechanical ventilation or significant medications to support blood pressure. There is a possibility that our product candidates could have similarly life threatening serious adverse side effects, such as ICANS and CRS.
Previous wording
Our product candidates may have serious and potentially fatal consequences due to the targeting of cells within the body due to unexpected protein interactions with the CAR or CAAR. Although we have completed multiple preclinical studies designed to screen for toxicity caused by unintended off-target recognition by the cell binding domain of the DSG3 CAAR, MuSK CAAR and rese-cel and intend to screen future CAR and CAAR candidates not yet tested in patients through preclinical studies, our product candidates may still recognize and react with one or more proteins unrelated to the intended surface immunoglobin target protein to which it is designed to link. If unexpected binding occurs in normal tissue, our product candidates may target and kill the normal tissue in a patient, leading to serious and potentially fatal adverse events, undesirable side effects, toxicities or unexpected characteristics. Detection of any unexpected targeting may halt or delay any ongoing clinical trials for our product candidates and prevent or delay regulatory approval. While we have developed a preclinical screening process to identify cross-reactivity of our product candidates, we cannot be certain that this process will identify all potential tissue that our product candidates may target. For example, a membrane protein array with DSG3-CAART yielded one weak signal against a protein that is designed to bind to glycoproteins and which was detected in both the test and control conditions. Further analysis of this protein in confirmatory cell-based assays repeatedly demonstrated that DSG3-CAART does not recognize nor activate against this protein. We performed similar preclinical studies for the MuSK CAAR and rese-cel and did not observe any confirmed off target activity for MuSK-CAART or rese-cel. However, this further analysis may prove to be inaccurate. Any unexpected targeting that impacts patient safety could materially impact our ability to advance our product candidates into clinical trials or to proceed to marketing approval and commercialization. Furthermore, in the event subjects are re-treated, they may respond differently than other subjects given the same dose, and may not tolerate the dose or develop safety concerns.
Current wording
Our product candidates may have serious and potentially fatal consequences due to the targeting of cells within the body due to unexpected protein interactions with the CAR or CAAR. Although we have completed multiple preclinical studies designed to screen for toxicity caused by unintended off-target recognition by the cell binding domain of the DSG3 CAAR, MuSK CAAR and rese-cel and intend to screen future CAR candidates not yet tested in patients through preclinical studies, our product candidates may still recognize and react with one or more proteins unrelated to the intended surface immunoglobin target protein to which it is designed to link. If unexpected binding occurs in normal tissue, our product candidates may target and kill the normal tissue in a patient, leading to serious and potentially fatal adverse events, undesirable side effects, toxicities or unexpected characteristics. Detection of any unexpected targeting may halt or delay any ongoing clinical trials for our product candidates and prevent or delay regulatory approval. While we have developed a preclinical screening process to identify cross-reactivity of our product candidates, we cannot be certain that this process will identify all potential tissue that our product candidates may target. For example, a membrane protein array with DSG3-CAART yielded one weak signal against a protein that is designed to bind to glycoproteins and which was detected in both the test and control conditions. Further analysis of this protein in confirmatory cell-based assays repeatedly demonstrated that DSG3-CAART does not recognize nor activate against this protein. We performed similar preclinical studies for rese-cel and did not observe any confirmed off target activity for rese-cel. However, this further analysis may prove to be inaccurate. Any unexpected targeting that impacts patient safety could materially impact our ability to advance our product candidates into clinical trials or to proceed to marketing approval and commercialization. Furthermore, in the event subjects are re-treated, they may respond differently than other subjects given the same dose, and may not tolerate the dose or develop safety concerns.
Previous wording
In oncology patients receiving CAR T cell therapy, a lymphodepleting preconditioning regimen is typically used to condition the patient prior to CAR T cell infusion in order to improve tumor immunogenicity and to promote the expansion of the infused CAR T cells. Together, these effects have been shown to enhance the clinical activity of CAR T cells in oncology patients. These regimens often include cyclophosphamide and fludarabine and are usually administered within the week prior to infusion of CAR T cells. We implemented a preconditioning regimen in the DesCAARTes TM trial where certain subjects were pre-treated with IVIg and cyclophosphamide, and other patients were pre-treated with IVIg, cyclophosphamide, and fludarabine prior to DSG3-CAART infusion, have included planned dosing cohorts in the MusCAARTes TM trial where subjects are pre-treated with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide prior to MuSK-CAART infusion, and we have incorporated a lymphodepleting preconditioning regimen of fludarabine and cyclophosphamide in our RESETTM clinical trials. We are evaluating rese-cel without preconditioning in our RESET-PVTM trial in patients with mPV and mcPV. Serious adverse events have been observed in some patients following CAR T cell infusion, and these include infection, cytokine release syndrome and ICANS. The lymphodepleting and immunomodulatory preconditioning regimen may contribute to the occurrence and severity of these adverse events due to its role in inducing leukopenia, or low levels of white blood cells in the blood, including lymphopenia, or low levels of lymphocytes in the blood, and regulating the activation and effector functions of other immune cells and antibodies, and enhanced CAR T cell activity.
Current wording
In oncology patients receiving CAR T cell therapy, a lymphodepleting preconditioning regimen is typically used to condition the patient prior to CAR T cell infusion in order to improve tumor immunogenicity and to promote the expansion of the infused CAR T cells. Together, these effects have been shown to enhance the clinical activity of CAR T cells in oncology patients. These regimens often include cyclophosphamide and fludarabine and are usually administered within the week prior to infusion of CAR T cells. We implemented a preconditioning regimen in the DesCAARTes TM trial where certain subjects were pre-treated with IVIg and cyclophosphamide, and other patients were pre-treated with IVIg, cyclophosphamide, and fludarabine prior to DSG3-CAART infusion, have included planned dosing cohorts in the MusCAARTes TM trial where subjects were pre-treated with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide prior to MuSK-CAART infusion, and we have incorporated a lymphodepleting preconditioning regimen of fludarabine and cyclophosphamide in our RESETTM clinical trials. We are evaluating rese-cel without preconditioning in our RESET-PV® trial in patients with mPV and mcPV, as well as in a subset of patients enrolled in our RESET-SLETM trial. Serious adverse events have been observed in some patients following CAR T cell infusion, and these include infection, cytokine release syndrome and ICANS. The lymphodepleting and immunomodulatory preconditioning regimen may contribute to the occurrence and severity of these adverse events due to its role in inducing leukopenia, or low levels of white blood cells in the blood, including lymphopenia, or low levels of lymphocytes in the blood, and regulating the activation and effector functions of other immune cells and antibodies, and enhanced CAR T cell activity.
Previous wording
In addition, a lymphodepleting regimen may eliminate pathogenic B cells targeted by our CAAR T cell product candidates. As a result, any lymphodepleting regimen for preconditioning that we use may delay or otherwise adversely affect our ability to use DSG3 or MuSK autoantibody titers, a standard clinical assay, to assess the activity of DSG3-CAART and MuSK-CAART, respectively. An inability to use DSG3 or MuSK autoantibody levels to demonstrate the specific activity of our CAAR T cell product candidates may require us to rely on the subjective measurement of blister formation in patients in the DesCAARTes TMtrial or muscle weakness in the MusCAARTes TM trial, which can be a less sensitive and accurate measurement of CAAR T cell activity. This therefore could delay a signal of potential biologic activity attributable to CAAR and therefore may slow clinical development. We will continue to evaluate emerging data from the MusCAARTes TM trial on an ongoing basis, as well as other relevant clinical trials in autoimmune disease, and may make additional modifications, as appropriate.
Current wording
In addition, a lymphodepleting regimen may eliminate pathogenic B cells targeted by our CAAR T cell product candidates. As a result, any lymphodepleting regimen for preconditioning that we use may delay or otherwise adversely affect our ability to use DSG3 or MuSK autoantibody titers, a standard clinical assay, to assess the activity of DSG3-CAART and MuSK-CAART, respectively. An inability to use DSG3 or MuSK autoantibody levels to demonstrate the specific activity of our CAAR T cell product candidates may require us to rely on the subjective measurement of blister formation in patients in the DesCAARTes TMtrial or muscle weakness in the MusCAARTes TM trial, which can be a less sensitive and accurate measurement of CAAR T cell activity. This therefore could delay a signal of potential biologic activity attributable to CAAR and therefore may slow clinical development. We are not actively enrolling patients in the MusCAARTes TM trial at this time.
Previous wording
Subjects in our RESETTM trials, except for our RESET-PVTM trial, will be treated with a standard preconditioning regimen consisting of fludarabine and cyclophosphamide prior to rese-cel infusion. In addition, the lymphodepleting regimen may eliminate some of the pathogenic B cells targeted by rese-cel. As a result, the lymphodepleting regimen may contribute to the initial clinical response that may be observed after rese-cel, which may make interpretation of early efficacy difficult to assess and may also delay our ability to characterize the activity of rese-cel independent of the effects of fludarabine and cyclophosphamide. We intend to evaluate this potential impact of preconditioning in our CAAR and rese-cel studies, through the comparison to non-lymphodepletion arms.
Current wording
Subjects in our RESETTM trials, except for our RESET-PV® trial and a subset of patients enrolled in our RESET-SLETM trial, will be treated with a standard preconditioning regimen consisting of fludarabine and cyclophosphamide prior to rese-cel infusion. In addition, the lymphodepleting regimen may eliminate some of the pathogenic B cells targeted by rese-cel. As a result, the lymphodepleting regimen may contribute to the initial clinical response that may be observed after rese-cel, which may make interpretation of early efficacy difficult to assess and may also delay our ability to characterize the activity of rese-cel independent of the effects of fludarabine and cyclophosphamide. We intend to evaluate this potential impact of preconditioning in our CAAR and rese-cel studies, through the comparison to non-lymphodepletion arms.
Previous wording
The initial clinical results we have observed may not be predictive of results of subsequent cohorts in this clinical trial, or of any future clinical trials. Because rese-cel, DSG3-CAART and MuSK-CAART are the first three product candidates that we are testing in the clinic, we may experience preliminary complications surrounding trial design, protocol establishment and execution, establishing trial protocols, patient recruitment and enrollment, quality and supply of clinical doses, or safety issues.
Current wording
The initial clinical results we have observed may not be predictive of results of subsequent cohorts in this clinical trial, or of any future clinical trials. Because rese-cel is the first CAR T product candidate that we are testing in the clinic, we may experience preliminary complications surrounding trial design, protocol establishment and execution, establishing trial protocols, patient recruitment and enrollment, quality and supply of clinical doses, or safety issues.
Previous wording
Additionally, a failure of our clinical trials of DSG3-CAART, MuSK-CAART or rese-cel RESETTM trials could influence physicians’ and regulators’ opinions with regard to the viability of our CABA® platform more broadly, particularly if treatment-related side effects are observed. The occurrence of any of these risks could significantly harm our development plans and business prospects. If treatment-related side effects are observed with the administration of DSG3-CAART, MuSK-CAART or rese-cel, or if they are viewed as less safe, potent or pure than other therapies, our ability to develop other CAAR T or CAR T cell therapies may be significantly harmed.
Current wording
Additionally, a failure of our rese-cel RESETTM clinical trial could influence physicians’ and regulators’ opinions with regard to the viability of our CABA® platform more broadly, particularly if treatment-related side effects are observed. The occurrence of any of these risks could significantly harm our development plans and business prospects. If treatment-related side effects are observed with the administration of rese-cel, or if they are viewed as less safe, potent or pure than other therapies, our ability to develop other CAR T cell therapies may be significantly harmed.
Previous wording
We have not yet demonstrated our ability to successfully complete any clinical trials, including large-scale, pivotal clinical trials, obtain regulatory approvals, manufacture a commercial scale product, or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful commercialization. Although our key employees have significant experience in leading clinical development programs, our experience conducting clinical trials with our product candidates is limited. We may not be able to file INDs or CTAs for any of our other product candidates on the timelines we expect, if at all. For example, we cannot be certain that the IND-enabling or CTA-enabling studies for our future product candidates will be completed in a timely manner or be successful or that the manufacturing process will be validated in a timely manner. Even if we submit an IND or CTA for a future product candidate, the FDA, the EMA, or other foreign regulatory authorities may not clear the IND or CTA and allow us to begin clinical trials in a timely manner or at all. The timing of submissions on future product candidates will be dependent on further preclinical and manufacturing success. Moreover, we cannot be sure that submission of an IND or a CTA will result in the FDA or other foreign regulatory authorities allowing further clinical trials to begin, or that, once begun, issues will not arise that require us to suspend or terminate clinical trials. Commencing each of these clinical trials is subject to finalizing the trial design based on discussions with the FDA and other foreign regulatory authorities. Any guidance we receive from the FDA or other foreign regulatory authorities is subject to change. These regulatory authorities could change their position, including, on the acceptability of our trial designs or the clinical endpoints selected, which may require us to complete additional clinical trials or impose stricter approval conditions than we currently expect.
Current wording
We have not yet demonstrated our ability to successfully complete any clinical trials, including large-scale, pivotal clinical trials, obtain regulatory approvals, manufacture a commercial scale product, or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful commercialization. Although our key employees have significant experience in leading clinical development programs, our experience conducting clinical trials with our product candidates is limited. We may not be able to file INDs or CTAs for any of our other product candidates on the timelines we expect, if at all. For example, we cannot be certain that the IND-enabling or CTA-enabling studies for our future product candidates will be completed in a timely manner or be successful or that the manufacturing process will be validated in a timely manner. Even if we submit an IND or CTA for a future product candidate, the FDA, the EMA, or other foreign regulatory authorities may not clear the IND or CTA and allow us to begin clinical trials in a timely manner or at all. The timing of submissions on future product candidates will be dependent on further preclinical and manufacturing success. Moreover, we cannot be sure that submission of an IND or a CTA will result in the FDA or other foreign regulatory authorities allowing further clinical trials to begin, or that, once begun, issues will not arise that require us to suspend or terminate clinical trials. Commencing each of these clinical trials is subject to finalizing the trial design based on discussions with the FDA and other foreign regulatory authorities. Any guidance we receive from the FDA or other foreign regulatory authorities is subject to change. These regulatory authorities could change their position, including, on the acceptability of our trial designs or selection of comparator or clinical endpoints, which may require us to complete additional clinical trials or impose stricter approval conditions than we currently expect. If the FDA disagrees with, or subsequently revises or withdraws its prior feedback regarding our clinical endpoints or how to measure clinically meaningful significance, then even if we meet clinical endpoints we may be prevented or delayed in obtaining marketing approval for such product candidates.
Previous wording
In order to market any product outside of the United States, a company must also comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries and jurisdictions regarding quality, safety and efficacy and governing, among other things, clinical trials, marketing authorization, commercial sales and distribution of products. Whether or not it obtains FDA approval for a product, an applicant will need to obtain the necessary approvals by the comparable foreign regulatory authorities before it can commence clinical trials or marketing of the product in those countries or jurisdictions. For example, the process governing approval of medicinal products in the European Union generally follows the same lines as in the United States but can differ in significant ways as well. It entails satisfactory completion of preclinical studies and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to establish the safety and efficacy of the product for each proposed indication. It also requires the submission to the relevant competent authorities of a marketing authorization application and granting of a marketing authorization by these authorities before the product can be marketed and sold in the European Union.
Current wording
In order to market any product outside of the United States, a company must also comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries and jurisdictions regarding quality, safety and efficacy and governing, among other things, clinical trials, marketing authorization, commercial sales and distribution of products. Whether or not it obtains FDA approval for a product, an applicant must obtain the necessary approvals by the comparable foreign regulatory authorities before commencing clinical trials or marketing of the product in those countries or jurisdictions. For example, the process governing approval of medicinal products in the European Union generally follows the same lines as in the United States but can differ in significant ways. It entails the satisfactory completion of preclinical studies and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to establish the safety and efficacy of the product for each proposed indication. It also requires the submission of a marketing authorization application to the EMA (for products within the scope of the centralized marketing authorization procedure) and the granting of a marketing authorization by the European Commission before the product can be marketed and sold in the European Union.
Previous wording
Our DesCAARTes TM trial, MusCAARTes TM trial, and RESETTM trials in SLE, myositis, SSc, gMG, MS and PV are designed as open-label trials. From time to time, we may publicly disclose interim, preliminary or topline data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials, including safety data and evaluations of efficacy, which will be based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following our receipt of additional data or a more comprehensive review of the data related to the particular study or trial. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data.
Current wording
Our RESETTM trials in SLE, myositis, SSc, gMG, MS and PV are designed as open-label trials. From time to time, we may publicly disclose interim, preliminary or topline data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials, including safety data and evaluations of efficacy, which will be based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following our receipt of additional data or a more comprehensive review of the data related to the particular study or trial. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data.
Previous wording
As a result, the 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. Topline data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result, topline data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. From time to time, we may also disclose interim data from planned interim analyses in our clinical trials. Interim data from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available. Adverse differences between preliminary or interim data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects. Further, disclosure of interim data by us or our competitors, or by patients or caregivers who are aware that a patient is receiving investigational product, due to the open-label design of the trial, could result in volatility in the price of our common stock.
Current wording
Topline data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result, topline data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. From time to time, we may also disclose interim data from planned interim analyses in our clinical trials. Interim data from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available. Adverse differences between preliminary or interim data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects. Further, disclosure of interim data by us or our competitors, or by patients or caregivers who are aware that a patient is receiving investigational product, due to the open-label design of the trial, could result in volatility in the price of our common stock.
Previous wording
Social media is increasingly being used to communicate about our clinical development programs and the diseases our product candidates are being developed to treat. We intend to utilize appropriate social media in connection with communicating about our development programs. Social media practices in the biopharmaceutical industry continue to evolve and regulations relating to such use are not always clear. This evolution creates uncertainty and risk of noncompliance with regulations applicable to our business. For example, patients may use social media channels to report an alleged adverse event during a clinical trial. When such disclosures occur, there is a risk that we fail to monitor and comply with applicable adverse event reporting obligations, or we may not be able to defend our business or the public’s legitimate interests in the face of the political and market pressures generated by social media due to restrictions on what we may say about our investigational products. There is also a risk of inappropriate disclosure of sensitive information or negative or inaccurate posts or comments about us on any social networking website, or a risk that a post on a social networking website by any of our employees may be construed as inappropriate promotion. If any of these events were to occur or we otherwise fail to comply with applicable regulations, we could incur liability, face regulatory actions, or incur other harm to our business.
Current wording
Social media is increasingly being used to communicate about our clinical development programs and the diseases our product candidates are being developed to treat. We intend to utilize appropriate social media in connection with communicating about our development programs. Social media practices in the biopharmaceutical industry continue to evolve and regulations relating to such use are not always clear. This evolution creates uncertainty and risk of noncompliance with regulations applicable to our business. For example, patients may use social media channels to report an alleged adverse event during a clinical trial, or public news outlets and opinion pieces relating to our industry or CAR T therapies more generally may be published and/or disseminated. When such disclosures occur, there is a risk that we fail to monitor and comply with applicable adverse event reporting obligations, or we may not be able to defend our business or the public’s legitimate interests in the face of the political and market pressures generated by social media due to restrictions on what we may say about our investigational products and/or the industry in which we operate. There is also a risk of inappropriate disclosure of sensitive information or negative or inaccurate posts or comments about us on any social networking website, or a risk that a post on a social networking website by any of our employees may be construed as inappropriate promotion. If any of these events were to occur or we otherwise fail to comply with any applicable regulations, we could incur liability, face regulatory actions, or incur other harm to our business such as reputational damage.
Previous wording
For our RESETTM, DSG3-CAART, MuSK-CAART and other planned clinical trials, we expect to continue to contract with academic medical centers and hospitals experienced in the assessment and management of toxicities arising during clinical trials. In the future, we may also contract with non-academic medical centers and hospitals with similar capabilities. Nonetheless, these centers and hospitals may have difficulty observing patients, including due to failure by patients to comply with post-clinical trial follow-up programs, and treating toxicities, which may be more challenging due to personnel changes, inexperience, inadequate institutional safety procedures, shift changes, house staff coverage or related issues. This could lead to more severe or prolonged toxicities or even patient deaths, which could result in us or the FDA delaying, suspending or terminating one or more of our clinical trials, and which could jeopardize regulatory approval. We also expect the centers using rese-cel, DSG3-CAART, MuSK-CAART and our other product candidates, if licensed, on a commercial basis could have similar difficulty in managing adverse events. Medicines used at centers to help manage adverse side effects of rese-cel, DSG3-CAART, MuSK-CAART and our other product candidates may not adequately control the side effects and/or may have a detrimental impact on the efficacy of the treatment.
Current wording
For our RESETTM and other planned clinical trials, we expect to continue to contract with academic medical centers and hospitals experienced in the assessment and management of toxicities arising during clinical trials. In the future, we may also contract with non-academic medical centers and hospitals with similar capabilities. Nonetheless, these centers and hospitals may have difficulty observing patients, including due to failure by patients to comply with post-clinical trial follow-up programs, and treating toxicities, which may be more challenging due to personnel changes, inexperience, inadequate institutional safety procedures, shift changes, house staff coverage or related issues. This could lead to more severe or prolonged toxicities or even patient deaths, which could result in us or the FDA delaying, suspending or terminating one or more of our clinical trials, and which could jeopardize regulatory approval. We also expect the centers using rese-cel and our other product candidates, if licensed, on a commercial basis could have similar difficulty in managing adverse events. Medicines used at centers to help manage adverse side effects of rese-cel, DSG3-CAART, MuSK-CAART and our other product candidates may not adequately control the side effects and/or may have a detrimental impact on the efficacy of the treatment.
Previous wording
Our DesCAARTes TM trial, our MusCAARTes TM trial, our RESETTM trials in SLE, myositis, SSc, gMG, PV and MS and any additional expected clinical trials for each of our product candidates will enroll a limited number of patients. The activity and toxicity data from these clinical trials of our product candidates may differ from future results of subsequent clinical trials that enroll a larger number of patients. Since the number of patients that we plan to dose in our MusCAARTes TM trial, our RESETTM trials in SLE, myositis, SSc, gMG, PV and MS is small, and the number of patients in clinical trials for any future product candidates may be small, the results from such clinical trials, once completed, may be less reliable than results achieved in larger clinical trials, which may hinder our efforts to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates. In our RESET-PVTM trial, RESET-MSTM and our MusCAARTes TM trial, we plan to evaluate the toxicity profile of our product candidates and establish the recommended dose for the next clinical trial. The preliminary results of clinical trials with smaller sample sizes, such as our DesCAARTes TM trial, our MusCAARTes TM trial and our RESETTM trials, as well as any clinical trials for future product candidates, can be disproportionately influenced by various biases associated with the conduct of small clinical trials, such as the potential failure of the smaller sample size to accurately depict the features of the broader patient population, which limits the ability to generalize the results across a broader community, thus making the clinical trial results less reliable than clinical trials with a larger number of patients. As a result, there may be less certainty that such product candidates would achieve a statistically significant effect in any future clinical trials. If we conduct any future clinical trials of DSG3-CAART, MuSK-CAART, or rese-cel, we may not achieve a statistically significant result or the same level of statistical significance, if any, that we might have anticipated based on the results observed in our DesCAARTes TM trial, our MusCAARTes TM trial, and RESETTM trials, respectively.
Current wording
Our RESETTM trials in SLE, myositis, SSc, gMG, PV and MS and any additional expected clinical trials for each of our product candidates will enroll a limited number of patients. The activity and toxicity data from these clinical trials of our product candidates may differ from future results of subsequent clinical trials that enroll a larger number of patients. Since the number of patients that we plan to dose in our RESETTM trials in SLE, myositis, SSc, gMG, PV and MS is small, and the number of patients in clinical trials for any future product candidates may be small, the results from such clinical trials, once completed, may be less reliable than results achieved in larger clinical trials, which may hinder our efforts to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates. In a subset of our RESET-SLETM trial, our RESET-PV®trial and our RESET-MSTM trial, we plan to evaluate the toxicity profile of our product candidates and establish the recommended dose for the next clinical trial. The preliminary results of clinical trials with smaller sample sizes, such as our RESETTM trials, as well as any clinical trials for future product candidates, can be disproportionately influenced by various biases associated with the conduct of small clinical trials, such as the potential failure of the smaller sample size to accurately depict the features of the broader patient population, which limits the ability to generalize the results across a broader community, thus making the clinical trial results less reliable than clinical trials with a larger number of patients. As a result, there may be less certainty that such product candidates would achieve a statistically significant effect in any future clinical trials. If we conduct any future clinical trials of rese-cel, we may not achieve a statistically significant result or the same level of statistical significance, if any, that we might have anticipated based on the results observed in our RESETTM trials.
Previous wording
The biopharmaceutical and pharmaceutical industries are characterized by rapidly advancing technologies, intense competition and a strong focus on intellectual property. We face competition from many different players, including large and specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic research organizations and governmental agencies. Any therapeutic candidates we successfully develop and commercialize will compete with the existing standard of care as well as novel therapies that may gain regulatory approval in the future. Many of our competitors have substantially greater financial, technical and other resources, such as larger research and development staff and experienced marketing and manufacturing organizations and well-established sales forces. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large, established companies. Mergers and acquisitions in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries may result in even more resources being concentrated in our competitors. Although we are the first and only company developing CAAR T drug candidates, we are one of several developing CAR T drug candidates for the treatment of autoimmune diseases where B cells may play a role in initiating or maintaining disease. Additionally, despite the significant differences in discovery, development and target populations between oncology and autoimmune targets, we recognize that companies with an investment and expertise in CAR T cell development for oncology indications could also attempt to leverage their expertise into autoimmune diseases where B cells may play a role in initiating or maintaining disease affected populations. Competition may increase further as a result of advances in the commercial applicability of technologies and greater availability of capital for investment in these industries. Our competitors, either alone or with collaborative partners, may succeed in developing, acquiring or licensing on an exclusive basis drug or biologic products that are more effective, safer, more easily commercialized or less costly than our product candidates or may develop proprietary technologies or secure patent protection that we may need for the development of our technologies and products.
Current wording
The biopharmaceutical and pharmaceutical industries are characterized by rapidly advancing technologies, intense competition and a strong focus on intellectual property. We face competition from many different players, including large and specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic research organizations and governmental agencies. Any therapeutic candidates we successfully develop and commercialize will compete with the existing standard of care as well as novel therapies that may gain regulatory approval in the future. Many of our competitors have substantially greater financial, technical and other resources, such as larger research and development staff and experienced marketing and manufacturing organizations and well-established sales forces. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large, established companies. Mergers and acquisitions in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries may result in even more resources being concentrated in our competitors. We are one of several companies developing CAR T drug candidates for the treatment of autoimmune diseases where B cells may play a role in initiating or maintaining disease. Additionally, despite the significant differences in discovery, development and target populations between oncology and autoimmune targets, we recognize that companies with an investment and expertise in CAR T cell development for oncology indications could also attempt to leverage their expertise into autoimmune diseases where B cells may play a role in initiating or maintaining disease affected populations. Competition may increase further as a result of advances in the commercial applicability of technologies and greater availability of capital for investment in these industries. Our competitors, either alone or with collaborative partners, may succeed in developing, acquiring or licensing on an exclusive basis drug or biologic products that are more effective, safer, more easily commercialized or less costly than our product candidates or may develop proprietary technologies or secure patent protection that we may need for the development of our technologies and products.
Previous wording
Specifically, while rituximab is the first drug to have received regulatory approval in the United States in over 60 years for the treatment of PV, the target indication for DSG3-CAART, and the indication we are evaluating in the RESET-PVTM study, we are aware that multiple biopharmaceutical companies have therapies in clinical development. We are also aware of other biopharmaceutical companies developing therapies for MuSK MG, SLE, myositis, SSc, gMG and MS. While we do not expect these product candidates to be directly competitive to our product candidates, even if we obtain regulatory approval of our product candidates, the availability and price of these other products could limit the demand and the price we are able to charge for our product candidates. We may not be able to implement our business plan if the acceptance of our product candidates is inhibited by price competition or the reluctance of physicians to switch from existing methods of treatment to our product candidates, or if physicians switch to other new drug or biologic products or choose to reserve our product candidates for use in limited circumstances.
Current wording
We are aware of several other biopharmaceutical companies developing therapies for SLE, myositis, SSc, gMG and PV. Some product candidates may be directly competitive to our product candidates, such that even if we obtain regulatory approval of our product candidates, the availability and price of these other products, whether directly competitive or not, could limit the demand and the price we are able to charge for our product candidates. We may not be able to implement our business plan if the acceptance of our product candidates is inhibited by price competition or the reluctance of physicians to switch from existing methods of treatment to our product candidates, or if physicians switch to other new drug or biologic products or choose to reserve our product candidates for use in limited circumstances.
Previous wording
One of our core strategies is to pursue clinical development of additional product candidates beyond rese-cel, DSG3-CAART and MuSK-CAART. Developing, obtaining regulatory approval and commercializing additional product candidates will require substantial additional funding and is prone to the risks of failure inherent in medical product development. We cannot provide you any assurance that we will be able to successfully advance any of these additional product candidates through the development process.
Current wording
One of our core strategies is to pursue clinical development of additional product candidates beyond rese-cel. Developing, obtaining regulatory approval and commercializing additional product candidates will require substantial additional funding and is prone to the risks of failure inherent in medical product development. We cannot provide you any assurance that we will be able to successfully advance any of these additional product candidates through the development process.
Previous wording
Our ability to compete in the highly competitive biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries depends upon our ability to attract and retain highly qualified managerial, scientific and medical personnel. We are highly dependent on our management, scientific, and medical personnel, including our Chief Executive Officer and President, our Scientific Advisory Board members, our President, Science and Technology, our Chief Medical Officer, and our Chief Financial Officer. The loss of the services of any of our executive officers, other key employees, and other scientific and medical advisors, and our inability to find suitable replacements could result in delays in product development and harm our business.
Current wording
Our ability to compete in the highly competitive biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries depends upon our ability to attract and retain highly qualified managerial, scientific and medical personnel. We are highly dependent on our management, scientific, and medical personnel, including our Chief Executive Officer and President, our Scientific Advisory Board members, our President, Science and Technology, our Chief Medical Officer, our Chief Financial Officer and our Chief Commercial Officer. The loss of the services of any of our executive officers, other key employees, and other scientific and medical advisors, and our inability to find suitable replacements could result in delays in product development and harm our business.
Previous wording
As of December 31, 2024, we had 160 full-time employees and two part-time employees. As our development and commercialization plans and strategies develop, and as we continue to broaden our operational capabilities, we expect to expand our employee base and continue to add managerial, operational, sales, research and development, marketing, financial and other personnel. Current and future growth imposes significant added responsibilities on members of management, including:
Current wording
As of December 31, 2025, we had 154 full-time employees and two part-time employees. As our development and commercialization plans and strategies develop, and as we continue to broaden our operational capabilities, we expect to expand our employee base and continue to add managerial, operational, sales, research and development, marketing, financial and other personnel. Current and future growth imposes significant added responsibilities on members of management, including:
Previous wording
Our operations, Penn’s operations, WuXi's operations and those of any CMOs, CROs and other contractors and consultants that we may engage could be subject to earthquakes, power shortages, telecommunications failures, water shortages, floods, hurricanes, typhoons, fires, extreme weather conditions, medical epidemics and other natural or man-made disasters or business interruptions, for which we are predominantly self-insured. Further, global conflicts or political unrest, such as the ongoing military conflict between Russia and Ukraine, the Israel-Hamas war, and the conflict in the Middle East may disrupt our global clinical trials and increase the likelihood of supply interruptions. Additionally, the effect of global financial and economic conditions and geopolitical events, including the presidential transition in the United States, events or changes related thereto or political unrest or otherwise, or similar events, may have an impact on our business. The occurrence of any of these business disruptions could seriously harm our research, clinical trials, operations and financial condition and increase our costs and expenses. Our ability to obtain clinical supplies of our product candidates could be disrupted if the operations of these suppliers are affected by a man-made or natural disaster or other business interruption.
Current wording
Our operations, Minaris Advanced Therapies, LLC, or Minaris', operations, Lonza Houston Inc., or Lonza's, operations, Cellares Corporation, or Cellares, and those of any CMOs, CROs and other contractors and consultants that we may engage could be subject to earthquakes, power shortages, telecommunications failures, water shortages, floods, hurricanes, typhoons, fires, extreme weather conditions, medical epidemics and other natural or man-made disasters or business interruptions, for which we are predominantly self-insured. Further, global conflicts or political unrest, such as the ongoing military conflict between Russia and Ukraine, the Israel-Hamas war, and the conflict in the Middle East may disrupt our global clinical trials and increase the likelihood of supply interruptions. Additionally, the effect of global financial and economic conditions and geopolitical events, including the consequences of the current administration in the United States, events or changes related thereto, including reductions in force at administrative agencies and tariffs, or political unrest or otherwise, or similar events, may have an impact on our business. Sanctions imposed by the U.S. and other countries in response to geopolitical events and conflicts may also adversely impact the financial markets and the global economy, and any economic countermeasures by the affected countries or others could exacerbate market and economic instability. The occurrence of any of these business disruptions could seriously harm our research, clinical trials, operations and financial condition and increase our costs and expenses. Our ability to obtain clinical supplies of our product candidates could be disrupted if the operations of these suppliers are affected by a man-made or natural disaster or other business interruption.
Previous wording
In addition, due to our adoption of a more flexible work model following the COVID-19 pandemic, our increased prevalence of personnel working from home may negatively impact productivity, or disrupt, delay, or otherwise adversely impact our business operations. Further, this could increase our cyber security risk, create data accessibility concerns, and make us more susceptible to communication disruptions, any of which could adversely impact our business operations or delay necessary interactions with local and federal regulators, ethics committees, manufacturing sites, research or clinical trial sites and other important agencies and contractors.
Current wording
In addition, the increased prevalence of personnel working from home may negatively impact productivity, or disrupt, delay, or otherwise adversely impact our business operations. Further, this could increase our cyber security risk, create data accessibility concerns, and make us more susceptible to communication disruptions, any of which could adversely impact our business operations or delay necessary interactions with local and federal regulators, ethics committees, manufacturing sites, research or clinical trial sites and other important agencies and contractors.
Previous wording
As a result, we are not profitable and have incurred net losses in each period since our inception. For the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, we recorded net losses of $115.9 million and $67.7 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2024, we had an accumulated deficit of $349.1 million. We expect to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future, and we expect these losses to increase substantially if, and as, we:
Current wording
As a result, we are not profitable and have incurred net losses in each period since our inception. For the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024, we recorded net losses of $167.9 million and $115.9 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $517.0 million. We expect to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future, and we expect these losses to increase substantially if, and as, we:
Previous wording
We currently do not have in-house resources sufficient to enable the development of our product candidates, including our CAR T and CAAR T cell platforms. We are reliant on several manufacturing and support services from Penn through two Master Translational Research Service Agreements, or the CAART Services Agreement and CARTA Services Agreement, respectively, and collectively, the Services Agreements. We also rely on Penn for current manufacturing of rese-cel. Our ability to rely on services from Penn is limited to a specified period of time, to specific capabilities, and is subject to Penn’s right to terminate these services with or without cause. We are reliant on WuXi manufacturing services for MuSK-CAART and rese-cel in multiple indications through a Development, Manufacturing and Testing Services Agreement, or the WuXi Agreement. Our ability to rely on services from WuXi is limited to a specified period of time, to specific capabilities, and is subject to WuXi's right to terminate these services with or without cause. If we are unable to establish necessary relationships with third party partners and/or build our own capabilities, our operating and financial results could differ materially from our expectations, and our business could suffer. As we build our own capabilities, and enter into agreements with third parties, we expect to encounter risks and uncertainties frequently experienced by growing companies in new and rapidly evolving fields, including the risks and uncertainties described herein.
Current wording
We currently do not have in-house resources sufficient to enable the development of our product candidates, including our CAR T and CAAR T cell platforms. We are reliant on Minaris manufacturing services for rese-cel in multiple indications through a Development, Manufacturing and Testing Services Agreement, or the Minaris Agreement. Our ability to rely on services from Minaris is limited to a specified period of time, to specific capabilities, and is subject to Minaris' right to terminate these services with or without cause. We are also reliant on Lonza manufacturing services for rese-cel in multiple indications through a Development and Manufacturing Services Agreement, or the Lonza Agreement. Our ability to rely on services from Lonza is limited to a specified period of time, to specific capabilities, and is subject to Lonza’s right to terminate these services with or without cause. If we are unable to establish necessary relationships with third party partners and/or build our own capabilities, our operating and financial results could differ materially from our expectations, and our business could suffer. As we build our own capabilities, and enter into agreements with third parties, we expect to encounter risks and uncertainties frequently experienced by growing companies in new and rapidly evolving fields, including the risks and uncertainties described herein.
Previous wording
Our operations have consumed substantial amounts of cash since inception. We expect to continue to spend substantial amounts to continue the preclinical and clinical development of our product candidates, including our MusCAARTes TM trial and our RESETTM trials, and our research and development, preclinical studies and clinical trials for any future product candidates, to seek regulatory approvals for our product candidates, to enable commercial production of our products, if licensed, and to initiate and complete registration trials for multiple products. As of December 31, 2024, we had $164.0 million of cash and cash equivalents. Since our initial public offering, we have generated cash from public offerings of our common stock and pre-funded warrants to purchase our common stock resulting in aggregate net proceeds of approximately $280.0 million. While we currently expect our existing cash and cash equivalents to be sufficient to fund our operations into the first half of 2026 which includes initial clinical data on efficacy endpoints and tolerability from the initial rese-cel treated patients in the RESETTM clinical trials, we expect to require significant additional financing to complete these clinical trials and any future clinical trials of these and our other product candidates. Further, if marketing approval is received, we will require significant additional amounts of cash to launch and commercialize our product candidates. However, we have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong. Additionally, changing circumstances may cause us to consume capital significantly faster than we currently anticipate, and we may need to spend more money than currently expected because of circumstances beyond our control. We may require substantial additional capital for the further development and commercialization of our product candidates, including funding our internal manufacturing capabilities, and may need to raise additional funds sooner if we choose to expand more rapidly than we presently anticipate. Because the length of time and activities associated with development of our product candidates is highly uncertain, we are unable to estimate the actual funds we will require for development and any approved marketing and commercialization activities. Our future funding requirements, both near- and long-term, will depend on many factors, including, but not limited to:
Current wording
Our operations have consumed substantial amounts of cash since inception. We expect to continue to spend substantial amounts to continue the preclinical and clinical development of our product candidates, including our RESETTM trials, and our research and development, preclinical studies and clinical trials for any future product candidates, to seek regulatory approvals for our product candidates, to enable commercial production of our products, if licensed, and to initiate and complete registration trials for multiple products. As of December 31, 2025, we had $133.6 million of cash, cash equivalents and investments. Since our initial public offering and through December 31, 2025, we have generated cash from public offerings of our common stock and pre-funded warrants to purchase our common stock resulting in aggregate net proceeds of approximately $384.0 million. While we currently expect our existing cash, cash equivalents and investments to be sufficient to fund our operations into the fourth quarter of 2026, which includes our plans to complete the Phase 1/2 RESET-SLETM, RESET-Myositis®, RESET-SSc TMand RESET-MGTM trials and generate clinical data from the RESET-PV® dose escalation trial and RESET-SLETM without preconditioning, we expect to require significant additional financing to complete these clinical trials and any future clinical trials of these and our other product candidates. Further, if marketing approval is received, we will require significant additional amounts of cash to launch and commercialize our product candidates. However, we have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong. Additionally, changing circumstances may cause us to consume capital significantly faster than we currently anticipate, and we may need to spend more money than currently expected because of circumstances beyond our control. We may require substantial additional capital for the further development and commercialization of our product candidates, including funding our internal manufacturing capabilities, and may need to raise additional funds sooner if we choose to expand more rapidly than we presently anticipate. Because the length of time and activities associated with development of our product candidates is highly uncertain, we are unable to estimate the actual funds we will require for development and any approved marketing and commercialization activities. Our future funding requirements, both near- and long-term, will depend on many factors, including, but not limited to:
Previous wording
Based on our current operating plan, we believe there is substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern for at least twelve months following the filing of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and we will need to obtain additional funding. We may be forced to delay or reduce the scope of our product development programs, reduce our research and development costs and/or limit or cease our operations if we are unable to obtain additional funding to support our current operating plan. Our cash forecast contains estimates and assumptions based on success of our ongoing clinical trials, and management cannot predict the amount or timing of all expenditures with certainty. Nevertheless, our financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty. We will need to raise additional capital to fund our future operations and remain as a going concern. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to obtain any or sufficient additional funding or that such funding, if available, will be obtainable on terms satisfactory to us.
Current wording
Based on our current operating plan, we believe there is substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern for at least twelve months following the filing of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and we will need to obtain additional funding. We may be forced to delay or reduce the scope of our product development programs, reduce our research and development costs and/or limit or cease our operations if we are unable to obtain additional funding to support our current operating plan. Our cash forecast contains estimates and assumptions based on the success of our ongoing clinical trials, and management cannot predict the amount or timing of all expenditures with certainty. Nevertheless, our financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty. We will need to raise additional capital to fund our future operations and remain as a going concern. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to obtain any or sufficient additional funding or that such funding, if available, will be obtainable on terms satisfactory to us.
Previous wording
On March 21, 2024, we filed a registration statement on Form S-3 (File No. 333-278126) with the SEC, as amended on March 31, 2025, which amendment is not yet declared effective, or the Shelf Registration Statement, in relation to the registration of common stock, preferred stock, debt securities, warrants and/or units of any combination thereof for the purposes of selling, from time to time, our common stock, debt securities or other equity securities in one or more offerings. We also simultaneously entered into a Sales Agreement, or the 2024 Sales Agreement, with Cowen and Company, LLC, or the Sales Agent, to provide for the offering, issuance and sale of up to an aggregate amount of $200.0 million of our common stock from time to time in “at-the-market”, offerings under the Shelf Registration Statement and subject to the limitations thereof. The Shelf Registration Statement and 2024 Sales Agreement replaced our former registration statement and sales agreement, pursuant to which we had a $100 million at-the-market offering program, all of which we sold. We will pay to the Sales Agent cash commissions of up to 3.0 percent of the aggregate gross proceeds of sales of common stock under the 2024 Sales Agreement. Sales of common stock, debt securities or other equity securities by us may represent a significant percentage of our common stock currently outstanding. If we sell, or the market perceives that we intend to sell, substantial amounts of our common stock under the Shelf Registration Statement or otherwise, the market price of our common stock could decline significantly. In December 2024, we sold 1,225,000 shares pursuant to the 2024 ATM Program for net proceeds of $5.1 million, after deducting commissions of $0.1 million.
Current wording
On August 7, 2025, we filed the 2025 Registration Statement (File No. 333-289339) with SEC, which was declared effective on August 15, 2025, in relation to the registration of common stock, preferred stock, debt securities, warrants and/or units of any combination thereof for the purposes of selling, from time to time, our common stock, debt securities or other equity securities in one or more offerings. We also simultaneously entered into the 2025 Sales Agreement with TD Cowen to provide for the offering, issuance and sale of up to an aggregate amount of $150.0 million of our common stock from time to time in “at-the-market” offerings, or 2025 ATM Program, under the 2025 Shelf Registration Statement and subject to the limitations thereof. During the year ended December 31, 2025, we sold 4,160,176 shares pursuant to the 2025 ATM Program for net proceeds of $10.2 million. Subsequent to December 31, 2025, we sold 8,055,260 shares of common stock pursuant to the 2025 ATM Program for net proceeds of $22.6 million.
Previous wording
Pursuant to our equity incentive plans, our management is authorized to grant stock options to our employees, directors and consultants. Additionally, the number of shares of our common stock reserved for issuance under the 2019 Stock Option and Incentive Plan, or the 2019 Plan, automatically increased on January 1, 2025 and will automatically increase each January 1 thereafter through and including January 1, 2029, by 4% of the total number of shares of our capital stock outstanding on December 31 of the preceding calendar year, or a lesser number of shares determined by our board of directors. Unless our board of directors elects not to increase the number of shares available for future grant each year, our stockholders may experience additional dilution, which could cause our stock price to fall. In addition, on April 7, 2023, our board of directors adopted, and at our 2023 annual meeting our stockholders approved, an amendment to the 2019 Plan, or the Plan Amendment, to increase the aggregate number of shares authorized for issuance under the 2019 Plan by 3,000,000 shares, subject to adjustment. Our compensation committee determined the size of the increase to the reserved pool under the Plan Amendment based on projected equity awards to anticipated new hires, projected annual equity awards to existing employees and an assessment of the magnitude of increase that our institutional investors and the firms that advise them would likely find acceptable. We anticipate that the increased share reserve under our 2019 Plan, as amended by the Plan Amendment, will be sufficient to provide equity incentives to attract, retain, and motivate employees for a period of two years following the effective date of the Plan Amendment.
Current wording
Pursuant to our equity incentive plans, our management is authorized to grant stock options to our employees, directors and consultants. Additionally, the number of shares of our common stock reserved for issuance under the 2019 Stock Option and Incentive Plan, or the 2019 Plan, automatically increased on January 1, 2026 and will automatically increase each January 1 thereafter through and including January 1, 2029, by 4% of the total number of shares of our capital stock outstanding on December 31 of the preceding calendar year, or a lesser number of shares determined by our board of directors. Unless our board of directors elects not to increase the number of shares available for future grant each year, our stockholders may experience additional dilution, which could cause our stock price to fall. In addition, on April 7, 2023, our board of directors adopted, and at our 2023 annual meeting our stockholders approved, an amendment to the 2019 Plan, or the Plan Amendment, to increase the aggregate number of shares authorized for issuance under the 2019 Plan by 3,000,000 shares, subject to adjustment.
Previous wording
We rely heavily on certain in-licensed patent and other intellectual property rights in connection with our development of our product candidates and, if we fail to comply with our obligations under our existing and any future intellectual property licenses with third parties, we could lose license rights that are important to our business.
Current wording
We rely heavily on certain in-licensed patent and other intellectual property rights in connection with our development of our product candidate and, if we fail to comply with our obligations under our existing and any future intellectual property licenses with third parties, we could lose license rights that are important to our business.
Previous wording
Our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates is heavily dependent on in-licenses to patent rights and other intellectual property granted to us by third parties. For example, we depend heavily on our License Agreement with Penn and CHOP, which was entered into in 2018, amended and restated in July 2019, and further amended in May 2020 and October 2021, pursuant to which we obtained (a) a non-exclusive, non-sublicensable, worldwide research license to intellectual property controlled by Penn and CHOP to make, have made and use products in two subfields of use, (b) effective as of October 2018, an exclusive, worldwide, royalty-bearing license, with the right to sublicense, under certain of such intellectual property to make, use, sell, offer for sale and import products in the same two subfields of use, and (c) effective as of October 2018, a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-bearing license, with limited rights to sublicense, under certain of Penn’s know-how, which know-how satisfies certain criteria and is listed on a mutually agreed to schedule, to make, have made, use, sell, offer for sale, import and have imported products in the same two subfields of use. We also depend on our Exclusive License Agreement with IASO, which was entered into in October 2022, pursuant to which we obtained a worldwide, exclusive license under certain intellectual property to develop, manufacture, commercialize and otherwise exploit T cell products directed to CD19 for the purpose of diagnosis, prevention or treatment of an autoimmune or alloimmune indication in humans, or the IASO Agreement. We may enter into additional license agreements in the future. Our license agreements with Penn, CHOP and IASO impose, and we expect that future license agreements will impose, various diligence, milestone payment, royalty, insurance and other obligations on us. If we fail to comply with our obligations under these licenses, our licensors, including Penn, CHOP and IASO may have the right to terminate these license agreements, in which event we might not be able to market our product candidates. Termination of any of our license agreements or reduction or elimination of our licensed rights may also result in our having to negotiate new or reinstated licenses with less favorable terms.
Current wording
Our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidate is heavily dependent on in-licenses to patent rights and other intellectual property granted to us by third parties. For example, we depend on our Exclusive License Agreement with IASO, which was entered into in October 2022, pursuant to which we obtained a worldwide, exclusive license under certain intellectual property to develop, manufacture, commercialize and otherwise exploit T cell products directed to CD19 for the purpose of diagnosis, prevention or treatment of an autoimmune or alloimmune indication in humans, or the IASO Agreement. We may enter into additional license agreements in the future. Our license agreement with IASO imposes, and we expect that future license agreements will impose, various diligence, milestone payment, royalty, insurance and other obligations on us. If we fail to comply with our obligations under these licenses, our licensors, including IASO may have the right to terminate these license agreements, in which event we might not be able to market our product candidate. Termination of any of our license agreements or reduction or elimination of our licensed rights may also result in our having to negotiate new or reinstated licenses with less favorable terms.
Previous wording
We may need to obtain additional licenses from third parties to advance our research or allow commercialization of our product candidates, and we have done so from time to time. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to develop or license replacement technology. If we are unable to do so, we may be unable to develop or commercialize the affected product candidates, which could harm our business significantly. We cannot provide any assurances that third-party patents do not exist which might be enforced against our current product candidates or future products, resulting in either an injunction prohibiting our sales, or, with respect to our sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties and/or other forms of compensation to third parties.
Current wording
We may need to obtain additional licenses from third parties to advance our research or allow commercialization of our product candidate, and we have done so from time to time. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to develop or license replacement technology. If we are unable to do so, we may be unable to develop or commercialize the affected product candidate, which could harm our business significantly. We cannot provide any assurances that third-party patents do not exist which might be enforced against our current product candidate or future products, resulting in either an injunction prohibiting our sales, or, with respect to our sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties and/or other forms of compensation to third parties.
Previous wording
Furthermore, in many cases, we may not have the right to control the preparation, filing and prosecution of patent applications, or to maintain the patents, covering technology that we in-license from third parties. For example, pursuant to our IASO Agreement, IASO controls such activities for the patent rights licensed to us under such agreement. Pursuant to our License Agreement with Penn and CHOP, Penn controls such activities for the patent rights licensed to us under such agreement. Therefore, although we provide input to IASO, Penn and CHOP on these activities, we cannot be certain that these patents will be prosecuted, maintained and enforced in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business. If our current or future licensors or collaboration partners fail to obtain, maintain or protect any patents or patent applications licensed to us, our rights to such patents and patent applications may be reduced or eliminated and our right to develop and commercialize any of our product candidates that are the subject of such licensed rights could be adversely affected.
Current wording
Furthermore, in many cases, we may not have the right to control the preparation, filing and prosecution of patent applications, or to maintain the patents, covering technology that we in-license from third parties. For example, pursuant to our IASO Agreement, IASO controls such activities for the patent rights licensed to us under such agreement. Therefore, although we provide input to IASO on these activities, we cannot be certain that these patents will be prosecuted, maintained and enforced in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business. If our current or future licensors or collaboration partners fail to obtain, maintain or protect any patents or patent applications licensed to us, our rights to such patents and patent applications may be reduced or eliminated and our right to develop and commercialize any of our product candidate that are the subject of such licensed rights could be adversely affected.
Previous wording
the scope of rights granted under the License Agreement or IASO Agreement and other interpretation-related issues;
Current wording
the scope of rights granted under the IASO Agreement and other interpretation-related issues;
Previous wording
whether we have breached the License Agreement or IASO Agreement and whether any such breach is subject to a cure period;
Current wording
whether we have breached the IASO Agreement and whether any such breach is subject to a cure period;
Previous wording
Furthermore, disputes may arise between us and our current or future licensors regarding the ownership of intellectual property developed by us, such that we may be required to assign or otherwise transfer such intellectual property to such licensor. In the event that the assigned or transferred intellectual property is covered by an existing license agreement with such licensor we may be required to make additional royalty or milestone payments, or both, to such licensor. If the assigned or transferred intellectual property is not covered by an existing license agreement, then we may be required to enter into an additional license agreement to advance our research or allow commercialization of our product candidates, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all.
Current wording
Furthermore, disputes may arise between us and our current or future licensors regarding the ownership of intellectual property developed by us, such that we may be required to assign or otherwise transfer such intellectual property to such licensor. In the event that the assigned or transferred intellectual property is covered by an existing license agreement with such licensor we may be required to make additional royalty or milestone payments, or both, to such licensor. If the assigned or transferred intellectual property is not covered by an existing license agreement, then we may be required to enter into an additional license agreement to advance our research or allow commercialization of our product candidate, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all.
Previous wording
If disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed, or license in the future, prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates.
Current wording
If disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed, or license in the future, prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidate.
Previous wording
Filing, prosecuting, maintaining, defending and enforcing patents on our product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States could be less extensive than those in the United States. Although our License Agreement and IASO Agreement grant us worldwide rights, there can be no assurance that we will obtain or maintain patent rights in or outside the United States under any future license agreements. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States even in jurisdictions where we and our licensors pursue patent protection. Consequently, we and our licensors may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, even in jurisdictions where we and our licensors pursue patent protection, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we and our licensors have not pursued and obtained patent protection to develop their own products and, further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we and our licensors have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our product candidates and the patents we in-license or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.
Current wording
Filing, prosecuting, maintaining, defending and enforcing patents on our product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States could be less extensive than those in the United States. Although our IASO Agreement grants us worldwide rights, there can be no assurance that we will obtain or maintain patent rights in or outside the United States under any future license agreements. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States even in jurisdictions where we and our licensors pursue patent protection. Consequently, we and our licensors may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, even in jurisdictions where we and our licensors pursue patent protection, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we and our licensors have not pursued and obtained patent protection to develop their own products and, further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we and our licensors have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our product candidates and the patents we in-license or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.
Previous wording
Certain of the intellectual property rights we have licensed, including rights licensed to us by Penn relating to our DSG3-CAART and DSG3/1-CAART product candidates, was generated through the use of U.S. government funding and may therefore be subject to certain federal laws and regulations. As a result, the U.S. government has certain rights to intellectual property embodied in our DSG3-CAART and DSG3/1-CAART product candidates and may have rights in future product candidates pursuant to the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980. These U.S. government rights in certain inventions developed under a government-funded program include a non-exclusive, non-transferable, irrevocable worldwide license to use inventions for any governmental purpose. In addition, the U.S. government has the right to require us to grant exclusive, partially exclusive, or non-exclusive licenses to any of these inventions to a third party if it determines that: (i) adequate steps have not been taken to commercialize the invention; (ii) government action is necessary to meet public health or safety needs; or (iii) government action is necessary to meet requirements for public use under federal regulations, also referred to as “march-in rights”. The U.S. government also has the right to take title to these inventions if we, or the applicable licensor, such as Penn, fail to disclose the invention to the government and fail to file an application to register the intellectual property within specified time limits. Intellectual property generated under a government funded program is also subject to certain reporting requirements, compliance with which may require us or the applicable licensor to expend substantial resources. In addition, the U.S. government requires that products embodying the subject invention or produced through the use of the subject invention be manufactured substantially in the United States. The manufacturing preference requirement can be waived if the owner of the intellectual property can show that reasonable but unsuccessful efforts have been made to grant licenses on similar terms to potential licensees that would be likely to manufacture substantially in the United States or that under the circumstances domestic manufacture is not commercially feasible. This preference for U.S. manufacturers may limit our ability to contract with non-U.S. product manufacturers for product candidates covered by such intellectual property.
Current wording
Certain of the intellectual property rights we have licensed were generated through the use of U.S. government funding and may therefore be subject to certain federal laws and regulations. As a result, the U.S. government has certain rights to intellectual property embodied in our DSG3-CAART product candidate and may have rights in future product candidates pursuant to the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980. These U.S. government rights in certain inventions developed under a government-funded program include a non-exclusive, non-transferable, irrevocable worldwide license to use inventions for any governmental purpose. In addition, the U.S. government has the right to require us to grant exclusive, partially exclusive, or non-exclusive licenses to any of these inventions to a third party if it determines that: (i) adequate steps have not been taken to commercialize the invention; (ii) government action is necessary to meet public health or safety needs; or (iii) government action is necessary to meet requirements for public use under federal regulations, also referred to as “march-in rights”. The U.S. government also has the right to take title to these inventions if we, or the applicable licensor, fail to disclose the invention to the government and fail to file an application to register the intellectual property within specified time limits. Intellectual property generated under a government funded program is also subject to certain reporting requirements, compliance with which may require us or the applicable licensor to expend substantial resources. In addition, the U.S. government requires that products embodying the subject invention or produced through the use of the subject invention be manufactured substantially in the United States. The manufacturing preference requirement can be waived if the owner of the intellectual property can show that reasonable but unsuccessful efforts have been made to grant licenses on similar terms to potential licensees that would be likely to manufacture substantially in the United States or that under the circumstances domestic manufacture is not commercially feasible. This preference for U.S. manufacturers may limit our ability to contract with non-U.S. product manufacturers for product candidates covered by such intellectual property.
Previous wording
Competitors may infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate patents, trademarks, copyrights or other intellectual property that we own or in-license. To counter infringement, misappropriation or other unauthorized use, we may be required to file claims, which can be expensive and time consuming and divert the time and attention of our management and scientific personnel. Any claims we assert against perceived violators could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us alleging that we infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate their intellectual property, in addition to counterclaims asserting that the patents we in-license are invalid or unenforceable, or both. In any patent infringement proceeding, there is a risk that a court will decide that a patent we own or in-license is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, and that we do not have the right to stop the other party from using the invention at issue.
Current wording
Competitors may infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate patents, trademarks, copyrights or other intellectual property that we own or in-license. To counter infringement, misappropriation or other unauthorized use, we may be required to file claims, which can be expensive and time consuming and divert the time and attention of our management and scientific personnel. Any claims we assert against perceived violators could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us alleging that we infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate their intellectual property, in addition to counterclaims asserting that the patents we in-license are invalid or unenforceable, or both. In any patent infringement proceeding, there is a risk that a court will decide that a patent we own or in-license is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, and that we do not have the right to stop the other party from using the invention at issue. In the U.S., grounds for a validity challenge in a court proceeding could be an alleged failure to meet one or more statutory requirements for patentability, including, for example, lack of novelty, obviousness, lack of written description or non-enablement. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could be an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant information from the USPTO, or made a misleading statement, during prosecution. Additionally, third parties are able to challenge the validity of issued patents through administrative proceedings in the patent offices of certain countries, including the USPTO and the European Patent Office.
Showing the first 40 of 81 pairs. Open the source sections for the rest.
Rearranged current paragraphs (3)
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
As a result, the 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.
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
As widely reported, global credit and financial markets have experienced extreme volatility and disruptions, including severely diminished liquidity and credit availability, declines in consumer confidence, declines in economic growth, increases in unemployment rates and uncertainty about economic stability. Regional or single-source dependencies may in some cases accentuate these risks. For example, the pharmaceutical industry in general, and in some instances we or our collaborators or other third parties on which we or they rely, depend on China-based suppliers or service providers for certain raw materials, products and services, or other activities, Our ability or the ability of our collaborators or such other third parties to continue to engage these China-based suppliers or service providers for certain preclinical research programs and clinical development programs could be restricted due to geopolitical developments between the United Sates and China.
Current report — wording carried from elsewhere
inappropriate disclosure of sensitive information or negative or inaccurate posts or comments about us on any social networking website;
Rearranged previous paragraphs (5)
Previous report — wording carried elsewhere
In the U.S., grounds for a validity challenge in a court proceeding could be an alleged failure to meet one or more statutory requirements for patentability, including, for example, lack of novelty, obviousness, lack of written description or non-enablement. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could be an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant information from the USPTO, or made a misleading statement, during prosecution. Additionally, third parties are able to challenge the validity of issued patents through administrative proceedings in the patent offices of certain countries, including the USPTO and the European Patent Office.
Previous report — wording carried elsewhere
Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management. Our licensors may face similar risks, which could have an adverse impact on intellectual property that is licensed to us.
Previous report — wording carried elsewhere
In addition, the CAART Services Agreement is scheduled to expire on the later of October 19, 2021 or completion of all research and development projects, and unless the CAART Services Agreement is amended, Penn will not be obligated to provide any further services under the CAART Services Agreement after that time. We currently anticipate that research and development projects under the CAART Services Agreement will continue through at least 2025. In addition, Penn has the right to terminate the CAART Services Agreement in whole at any time with 90 days’ notice and to terminate any research and development project being performed under the CAART Services Agreement if the Penn service provider appointed to lead such project is unavailable and Penn is unavailable to find a replacement within 60 days for such service provider. Penn also has the right to terminate certain manufacturing services being performed under the CAART Services Agreement with 180 days’ written notice. From time to time, we may enter into further addenda to the CAART Services Agreement that provide Penn with the right to terminate such addenda with limited notice periods. If we do not have adequate personnel and capabilities at the time that we assume responsibilities for such services, we may not be successful in effectively or efficiently transitioning these services from Penn, which could disrupt our business and have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. Even if we are able to successfully transition these services, they may be more expensive or less efficient than the services we are receiving from Penn during the transition period.
Previous report — wording carried elsewhere
federal policy that affect the geopolitical landscape could give rise to circumstances outside our control that could have negative impacts on our business operations. For example, in 2025, the United States imposed tariffs on imports on its trading partners, including Canada, Mexico, the EU and China. 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. Any changes in political, trade, regulatory, and economic conditions, including U.S. trade policies, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.
Previous report — wording carried elsewhere
Additionally, the California Privacy Rights Act, or CPRA, was passed in November 2020 and as of January 1, 2023 has imposed additional obligations on companies covered by the legislation. The CPRA significantly modified the CCPA, including by expanding consumers' rights with respect to certain sensitive personal information. The CPRA also created a new state agency that is vested with authority to implement and enforce the CCPA. While there is an exception for protected health information that is subject to HIPAA and clinical trial regulations, the effects of the CCPA, as amended by the CPRA are potentially significant and may require us to modify our data collection or processing practices and policies and to incur substantial costs and expenses in an effort to comply and decrease our potential exposure to regulatory enforcement and/or litigation.