t

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

Form 10-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2023

or

For the transition period from to

Commission File Number 001-36510

LARIMAR THERAPEUTICS, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

(844) 511-9056

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. ☐ Yes ☒ No

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. ☐ Yes ☒ No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☒ No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes ☒ No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☐

If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. ☐


Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant’s executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to §240.10D-1(b). ☐
 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ☐ No ☒

On the last business day of the most recently completed second fiscal quarter, the aggregate market value (based on the closing sale price of its common stock on that date) of the voting and non-voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was $80,218,629.

As of March 12, 2024, the registrant had 63,800,017 shares of the registrant’s Common Stock, $0.001 par value per share, outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K incorporates certain information by reference from the registrant’s proxy statement for the 2024 annual meeting of shareholders to be filed no later than 120 days after the end of the registrant’s fiscal year ended December 31, 2023.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Statements made in this Annual Report on Form 10-K that are not statements of historical or current facts are “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements discuss our business, operations and financial performance and conditions, as well as our plans, objectives and expectations for our business operations and financial performance and condition. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as “aim,” “anticipate,” “assume,” “believe,” “contemplate,” “continue,” “could,” “design,” “due,” “estimate,” “expect,” “goal,” “intend,” “may,” “objective,” “plan,” “predict,” “positioned,” “potential,” “seek,” “should,” “target,” “will,” “would” and other similar expressions that are predictions of or indicate future events and future trends, or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. In addition, statements that “we believe” or similar statements reflect our beliefs and opinions on the relevant subject only. These forward-looking statements, which are subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions about us, may include projections of our future financial performance, our anticipated growth strategies and anticipated trends in our business.

You should understand that the following important factors could affect our future results and could cause those results or other outcomes to differ materially from those expressed or implied in our forward-looking statements:

These forward-looking statements are based on management’s current expectations, estimates, forecasts and projections about our business and the industry in which we operate, and management’s beliefs and assumptions are not guarantees of future performance or development and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that are in some cases beyond our control. In light of the significant uncertainties in these forward-looking statements, you should not rely upon forward-looking statements as predictions of future events. Although we believe the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, the future results, levels of activity, performance or events and circumstances reflected in the forward-looking statements may not be achieved or occur at all. Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise after the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K or to reflect the occurrence of any unanticipated events. Comparisons of results for current and any prior periods are not intended to express any future trends or indications of future performance, unless expressed as such, and should only be viewed as historical data.

SUMMARY RISK FACTORS

The risk factors summarized and detailed below could materially harm our business, operating results and/or financial condition, and may impair our future prospects and/or cause the price of our common stock to decline. These are not all of the risks we face, and other factors not presently known to us or that we currently believe are immaterial may also affect our business if they occur. Material risks that may affect our business, operating results and financial condition include, but are not necessarily limited to, those relating to:

Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Need for Capital

Risks Related to Our Product Development and Regulatory Approvals

Risks Related to Our Business

Risks Related to Our Reliance on Third Parties

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property Rights

Risks Related to Our Common Stock

PART I

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

Overview

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company focused on developing treatments for patients suffering from complex rare diseases using our novel cell penetrating peptide ("CPP") technology platform. Our lead product candidate, nomlabofusp (nomlabofusp is the International Nonproprietary Name ("INN") and the United States Adopted Name ("USAN") for CTI-1601), is a subcutaneously administered, recombinant fusion protein intended to deliver tissue frataxin ("FXN"), an essential protein, to the mitochondria of patients with Friedreich's ataxia (“FA”). FA is a rare, progressive, and fatal disease in which patients are unable to produce sufficient FXN due to a genetic abnormality. Currently, there are no treatment options that address the core deficit of FA, low levels of FXN. Nomlabofusp represents the first potential therapy designed to increase FXN levels in patients with FA.

We believe that our CPP platform, which enables a therapeutic molecule to cross a cell membrane in order to reach intracellular targets, has the potential to enable the treatment of other rare and orphan diseases. We intend to use our proprietary platform to target additional orphan indications characterized by deficiencies in or alterations of intracellular content or activity.

Since our inception, we have devoted substantially all of our resources to developing nomlabofusp, building our intellectual property portfolio, developing third-party manufacturing capabilities, business planning, raising capital, and providing general and administrative support for such operations.

As of December 31, 2023, we had cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities of $86.8 million. In February 2024,we raised net proceeds of $161.6 million in an underwritten public offering of common stock, We anticipate the $161.6 million in net proceeds, together with $86.8 million of cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities on hand will fund operations into 2026.

Nomlabofusp Program Update

Clinical Trials

We have completed two Phase 1 clinical trials and a Phase 2 dose exploration trial, and recently initiated a Phase 2 OLE trial in patients with FA.

In May 2021, we reported positive top-line data from our Phase 1 FA program after completing dosing of the single ascending dose ("SAD") trial in December 2020 and of the multiple ascending dose ("MAD") trial in March 2021. Data from these trials demonstrated proof-of-concept by showing that daily subcutaneous injections of nomlabofusp for up to 13 days resulted in dose-dependent increases in FXN levels from baseline compared to placebo in all evaluated tissues (buccal cells, skin, and platelets). There were no serious adverse events associated with either the MAD or SAD trials.

In May 2023, we reported preliminary unblinded top-line data from the 25 mg cohort of our Phase 2 four-week, placebo-controlled, dose exploration trial of nomlabofusp in FA patients. Data from the cohort indicated nomlabofusp was generally well tolerated and showed increases in FXN levels from baseline compared to placebo in all evaluated tissues (skin and buccal cells) at day 14.

In July 2023, following the FDA’s review of our complete response to the partial clinical hold, the FDA cleared initiation of a second cohort (50 mg) of our four-week, placebo-controlled, Phase 2 dose exploration trial of nomlabofusp in patients and the initiation of our OLE trial with daily dosing of 25 mg.

In February 2024, we reported positive top-line data and successful completion of our four-week, placebo-controlled Phase 2 dose exploration study of nomlabofusp in participants with FA. Nomlabofusp was generally well tolerated and demonstrated dose dependent increases in FXN levels in all evaluated tissues (skin and buccal cells) after daily dosing of 14 days followed by every other day dosing until day 28 in the 25 mg and 50 mg cohorts. Participants in the 25 mg (n=13) and 50 mg (n=15) cohorts were randomized 2:1 to receive subcutaneous injections of nomlabofusp or placebo. Participants treated with 50 mg had individual frataxin levels in skin increase from less than 17% relative to healthy volunteers at baseline, to 33% to 59% of healthy volunteers after 14 days of treatment. Patients treated with placebo showed no increase in their frataxin levels during this period. Additionally, the majority of treated patients in both cohorts with quantifiable levels of frataxin at baseline and day 14 achieve at least

a 100% increase in tissue frataxin in skin cells, and at least a 30% increase in tissue frataxin levels in buccal cells. With both skin and buccal cells, when dosing is switched to every other day the magnitude of the increase declines.

In January 2024, we initiated the OLE trial evaluating daily subcutaneous injections of 25 mg of nomlabofusp self-administered or administered by a caregiver, with the first patient dosed in March 2024. Participants who completed treatment in the Phase 2 dose exploration trial, or who previously completed a prior clinical trial of nomlabofusp are potentially eligible to screen for the OLE. The OLE will evaluate safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics ("PK") and measures of frataxin levels in peripheral tissues as well as other exploratory PD (lipid profiles and gene expression data) following long-term subcutaneous administration of nomlabofusp. Clinical measures collected during the trial will be compared to data from a matched control arm derived from participants in the Friedreich’s Ataxia Clinical Outcome Measures Study (FACOMS) database. Dose escalation in the OLE trial will be considered based on safety, tolerability, PK, and tissue FXN levels from the Phase 2 trial’s 50 mg cohort as well as available data from the 25 mg dose of nomlabofusp in the OLE trial, and is contingent on FDA review as part of the partial clinical hold. Initial data from the OLE trial is expected in the fourth quarter of 2024.

Our Strategy

Our strategy is to become a leader in the treatment of rare diseases by leveraging our technology platform and applying our management team’s know how and expertise to the development of nomlabofusp and other future pipeline programs. Key elements of our strategy include:

Platform Technology for Treatment of Rare Genetic Diseases

There are estimated to be over 9,500 rare genetic diseases, which, collectively affect hundreds of millions of people worldwide. Of the hundreds of millions of individuals suffering from these rare genetic diseases, only approximately 5% have therapeutic options available to manage their disease. Many of these diseases result from a deficiency in the amount or the function of a particular target molecule, often a protein. Particularly challenging to treat are those diseases that result from the deficiency of a molecule that is active within a cell or within a cell-based organelle. The challenge to providing treatment of these diseases is the need to improve the amount or function of the therapeutic target by transporting a therapeutic element across the cell membrane and potentially the membrane of the organelle where the target is active in the diseased patients.

The ability to transport therapeutic proteins across biological membranes has, to date, not been reproducibly achieved. The collective population of people with rare diseases stands to benefit from the emergence of a scalable treatment platform that can transport therapeutic proteins across cell membranes to deliver them to the intracellular site of activity. In addition, traditionally, medical treatment for each rare genetic disorder has been approached on a disease-by-disease basis. This approach is inefficient, as there are thousands of diseases, each with a distinct patient population, that cannot be addressed by traditional therapeutic approaches and are in need of treatment options. Our understanding of our therapeutics derived from proprietary gene expression data across several disease models supports the concept that product candidates based on our platform technology could significantly impact common pathological mechanisms in various diseases with comparable etiologies. We are utilizing this approach to identify therapeutic opportunities where our molecules and technology are more likely to be impactful.

Nomlabofusp For the Treatment of Friedreich’s ataxia

Friedreich’s ataxia

Friedreich’s ataxia is a rare genetic disease that is the most commonly inherited ataxia in humans, with approximately 20,000 individuals living with Friedreich’s ataxia globally, and of these individuals, approximately 5,000 are in the United States and the majority of the remaining individuals are primarily in Europe. Friedreich’s ataxia results from a deficiency of the mitochondrial protein, FXN. FXN is an essential and phylogenetically conserved protein that is found in cells throughout the body, with the highest levels found in the heart, spinal cord, liver, pancreas, and skeletal muscle. FXN is encoded in the nucleus of the cell, expressed in the cytoplasm and transported into the mitochondria, where it is processed to the mature form. As part of this process the mitochondrial targeting sequence is cleaved off in the mitochondria by a naturally occurring enzyme.

Friedreich’s ataxia is a progressive multi-symptom disease typically presenting in mid-childhood that affects the functioning of multiple organs and systems. It is a debilitating neurodegenerative disease that results in poor coordination of legs and arms, progressive loss of the ability to walk, generalized weakness, loss of sensation, scoliosis, diabetes and cardiomyopathy as well as impaired vision, hearing and speech. Patients suffer from progressive neurologic and cardiac dysfunction. Key among these is a primary neurodegeneration of the dorsal root ganglia and the dentate nucleus of the cerebellum, which leads to the hallmark clinical findings of progressive limb ataxia and dysarthria. A hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is common and associated with early mortality, typically between 30 and 50 years of age. Omaveloxolone, the first drug approved for the treatment of FA, was approved by the FDA and the European Commission in February 2023 and February 2024, respectively.

Nomlabofusp

Nomlabofusp, an investigational biologic fusion protein that is administered subcutaneously, consists of a CPP genetically fused to human FXN, and includes a mitochondrial targeting sequence. Using our proprietary peptide delivery technology, nomlabofusp is designed to carry the molecule from the intravascular space across the cell membrane and into the mitochondria where the CPP and the mitochondrial targeting sequence are cleaved off to yield mature FXN. See Figure 1.

Figure 1.

We have completed two Phase 1 nomlabofusp clinical trials, and a Phase 2 dose exploration trial and have initiated an OLE study in the U.S with patients to be dosed 25 mg of nomlabofusp daily. The nomlabofusp program remains under a partial clinical hold imposed by the FDA, and expansion of the OLE study above the 25 mg dose level as well as further clinical development of nomlabofusp is contingent upon FDA agreement based on its review of data from the 50 mg cohort of the Phase 2 dose exploration study and review of the available data from the OLE study at the current 25 mg dose level. Based on the results of our non-clinical development program as well as results from our Phase 2 clinical trials, we believe that administering nomlabofusp may increase FXN levels in the mitochondria of patients with Friedreich’s ataxia and patients could potentially experience:

In our Phase 1 clinical trials, nomlabofusp appeared to increase FXN levels in the peripheral tissues that were tested (buccal cells, skin biopsies and platelets) and data from our Phase 2 dose exploration study demonstrated dose dependent increases in FXN levels in all evaluated tissues (skin and buccal cells) after daily dosing of 14 days followed by every other day dosing until day 28 in the 25 mg and 50 mg cohorts. Based on this, we believe that our technology may allow us to address other rare genetic diseases that either require the replacement of molecules that need to target specific intracellular organelles, or that share similar clinical symptoms that overlap with Friedreich’s ataxia. Finally, the use of nomlabofusp to improve mitochondrial function in other rare diseases that demonstrate evidence of mitochondrial dysfunction is also being explored.

Development of Nomlabofusp

Non-clinical Development

Knock-Out Mice and Other Non-clinical Studies

Nomlabofusp has been demonstrated to prolong the life of knock-out ("KO") mice whose heart and skeletal muscles were deficient in FXN. These mice, when untreated, develop a severe hypertrophic cardiomyopathy similar to patients with Friedreich’s ataxia and, like many Friedreich’s ataxia patients, die early in life. In non-clinical studies of nomlabofusp, the median survival in animals treated with vehicle of 98 days was extended to a median survival of 166 days in animals treated with nomlabofusp subcutaneously three times per week (p=0.0001). Furthermore, 87.5% of mice treated with nomlabofusp survived beyond the mean age of death in the vehicle treated group (107.5 days) whereas only 33% of vehicle treated animals survived. Results are reflected in Figure 2.

Figure 2.

In a separate study conducted at an independent laboratory, a similar mouse model was studied. In this study doses of 2 mg/kg, 10 mg/kg, 30 mg/kg, 60 mg/kg and 100 mg/kg administered subcutaneously every other day were compared to vehicle. After 2 weeks of dosing, mitochondrial extracts from cardiac tissue were analyzed for the presence of human FXN. In addition, activity of succinate dehydrogenase ("SDH") an enzyme whose activity is dependent on the presence of FXN, was also analyzed. Human FXN was found in the mitochondria of the cardiomyocytes and increased with increasing dose. SDH activity which was suppressed to near zero in vehicle treated animals was also suppressed to near zero in the 2 mg/kg dose group. In the 10 mg/kg dose group activity was increased and in the 30 mg/kg dose group the activity was returned to that of wild type animals. There was no further increase in activity when the animals were dosed with 60 mg/kg or 100 mg/kg but the effect was maintained at levels equivalent to that of wild type animals. See Figures 3 and 4.

Figure 3.

Figure 4.

Another study, also performed at an independent laboratory, demonstrated the maintenance of cardiac function when the same KO mouse model was studied. These mice were treated with nomlabofusp at doses of 10 mg/kg every other day for 6 weeks. Echocardiograms were performed prior to initiating dosing and after 4 weeks of dosing. When compared to vehicle, mice treated with nomlabofusp maintained their left ventricular volume and ejection fraction while vehicle treated mice deteriorated over the same 4-week period. See Figures 5 and 6.

Figure 5.

Figure 6.

Using a neurologic mouse model, treatment with nomlabofusp prevented the development of ataxia in mice whose nervous system was deficient in FXN compared to those treated with placebo.

In multiple non-clinical studies in rodents and non-human primates ("NHPs"), human FXN was found to be distributed into all tissues tested following nomlabofusp dosing. See Figure 7.

Figure 7.

Non-Human Primate and Rat Toxicology Studies

We previously conducted 28-day and 13-week GLP toxicology studies of nomlabofusp in two species, rat and NHP. In the rat studies, some injection sites showed edema and erythema with associated histologic changes localized to the injection site. The rat studies showed no significant clinical observations and no significant systemic histopathological findings. In the NHP studies, some injection sites were raised and firm with dose dependent histologic changes localized to the injection sites. The NHP 28-day study showed no systemic toxicity. The NHP 13-week study showed no systemic toxicity in the low and mid-dose groups, and minimal to mild histopathological findings in the high dose group. There were also several episodes of occasional transient muscle rigidity in some animals observed immediately after dosing in the two highest dose groups at very high exposures. These clinical observations resolved with no intervention and all of the NHPs who experienced these clinical observations received all doses and completed the in-life portion of the study.

To support extended dosing of patients with nomlabofusp, we conducted a 26-week NHP toxicology study in 2021. In May 2021, we notified the FDA of certain mortalities which occurred at the two highest dose levels in the then-ongoing study. On May 25, 2021, the FDA placed a clinical hold on the nomlabofusp clinical program. In the clinical hold letter, the FDA stated that it needed to review a full study report from the then-ongoing NHP study and that we could not initiate additional interventional clinical trials until we submitted such report and received notification from the FDA that additional clinical trials could commence. At the time of the FDA clinical hold, we had no interventional clinical trials with patients enrolled or enrolling.

In July 2021, we completed dosing in the 26-week NHP toxicology study. The study included four dose groups in addition to vehicle. Data from the study were collected throughout the second half of 2021 and included in the complete response to the clinical hold submitted to the FDA in January 2022.

In February 2022, in response to the complete response to the clinical hold we submitted to the FDA, the FDA stated that it was maintaining the clinical hold and that additional data were needed to resolve the clinical hold. We

subsequently submitted a request to the FDA for a Type C meeting, which was granted and held in July 2022. We submitted a complete response to clinical hold incorporating additional information requested by the FDA at the meeting as well as information on the proposed study in August 2022.

In September 2022, following the Type C meeting and the submission of the Company's complete response to clinical hold, the FDA allowed the 25 mg cohort of a Phase 2, four-week, placebo-controlled, dose exploration trial of nomlabofusp in FA patients discussed above to proceed. In connection with this decision, the FDA lifted its full clinical hold on the nomlabofusp clinical development program and imposed a partial clinical hold.

In June 2023, we met with the FDA. Following that meeting, we submitted a complete response to the FDA’s partial clinical hold that included unblinded safety, PK and frataxin data from the Phase 2 trial’s completed 25 mg cohort.

In July 2023, following the FDA’s review of our complete response to the partial clinical hold, the FDA cleared initiation of a second cohort at 50 mg of our four-week, placebo-controlled, Phase 2 dose exploration trial and initiation of our OLE trial with daily dosing of 25 mg.

Clinical Development

Non-Interventional Studies

We have conducted non-interventional studies to examine the range of tissue FXN concentrations in individuals who are homozygous for the normal FXN gene. Tissue samples in these studies were collected using the same sampling techniques and proprietary assay used in the interventional studies. In a 2020 study we obtained data from 8 healthy adults, but the study was then terminated early by the study site due to competing priorities during the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2021 we initiated a second study that enrolled approximately 60 healthy adults. Enrollment in this study was completed in 2022 and data has been used for comparison purposes in the Phase 2 clinical study described below. See Figure 8.

Figure 8.

FXN concentrations were measured in skin and buccal cells from 60 homozygous healthy volunteers utilizing the same sampling technique and assay as clinical trials of nomlabofusp; FXN levels measured via detection of peptide derived from mature FXN; FXN concentrations normalized to total cellular protein content in each sample. 1. E.C. Deutsch et al. Molecular Genetics and Metabolism 101 (2010) 238–245. 2. Friedreich’s Ataxia Research Alliance

Clinical Trials

Completed Phase 1 Clinical Studies in Adults with Friedreich’s Ataxia

We submitted our investigational New Drug application ("IND") application for nomlabofusp and began Phase 1 clinical trials in 2019 in patients with FA. We completed two clinical studies of nomlabofusp in adult subjects with FA, a SAD study (completed in 2020) and a MAD study (completed in 2021). The primary objective

for the SAD and MAD studies was to assess the tolerability of nomlabofusp at doses ranging from 25 mg to 100 mg administered via subcutaneous injection ("SC"). The secondary objectives were to establish the PK of nomlabofusp administration in humans and to explore the PD of nomlabofusp administration by measuring tissue FXN concentrations in accessible tissues, namely buccal and skin cells, and in platelets. Administration of nomlabofusp via SC injection appeared to be well tolerated up to doses of 100 mg administered daily for up to 13 days. No SAEs were reported in either study. The most common treatment emergent adverse events ("TEAEs") were injection site reactions ("ISRs") that were generally mild, self-limited, and usually resolved within approximately 1 hour. Patients in the 25 mg cohort were dosed once a day for the first 4 days followed by 1 dose every third day through day 13 for a total of 7 doses, while the patients in the 50 mg cohort were dosed once a day for the first 7 days followed by 1 dose every other day through day 13 for a total of 10 doses, and patients in the 100 mg cohort were dosed once a day for 13 days consecutively for a total of 13 doses (see Figures 9 and 10). The study was designed in this fashion to ensure that the PK of nomlabofusp in patients with FA were characterized at the lower doses before the dose was escalated. This is typical of first in human studies such as multiple-ascending dose trials that evaluate a study drug’s clinical safety profile.

There was rapid uptake of nomlabofusp into the circulation following subcutaneous injection, and exposure appears to be proportional to dose.

Figure 9.

Figure 10.

*FXN levels measured via detection of peptide derived from mature FXN; FXN concentrations are normalized to total cellular protein content in each sample; Data represent median and 25th and 75th percentiles; FXN levels from day 4, & day 13 measurements are shown for data derived from the 25 mg cohort; FXN levels from day 7 & day 13 measurements are shown for data derived from the 50 & 100 mg cohorts.

Completed Phase 2 Dose Exploration Study

The Phase 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled dose exploration study evaluated the safety, tolerability, PK and PD of two doses of nomlabofusp. Cohort 1 evaluated 25 mg and Cohort 2 evaluated 50 mg. Participants in either the 25 mg or 50 mg cohorts were randomized 2:1 to receive daily subcutaneous injections of either nomlabofusp or placebo for 14 days, and then every other day for an additional 14 days for a total 28-day dosing period.

In May 2023, we reported preliminary unblinded top-line data from the 25 mg cohort of the Phase 2 trial. Data from the cohort indicated nomlabofusp was generally well tolerated and showed increases in FXN levels from baseline compared to placebo in all evaluated tissues (skin and buccal cells) at day 14.

In June 2023, we met with the FDA. Following that meeting, we submitted a complete response to the FDA’s partial clinical hold that included unblinded safety, PK and frataxin data from the Phase 2 trial’s completed 25 mg cohort.

In July 2023, following the FDA’s review of our complete response to the partial clinical hold, the FDA cleared initiation of the second cohort (50 mg) of our four-week, placebo-controlled, Phase 2 dose exploration trial and the initiation of our OLE trial with daily dosing of 25 mg.

In February 2024, we reported positive top-line data and successful completion of our four-week, placebo-controlled Phase 2 dose exploration study of nomlabofusp in participants with FA. Nomlabofusp was generally well tolerated and demonstrated dose response in FXN levels in all evaluated tissues (skin and buccal cells) after daily dosing of 14 days followed by every other day dosing until day 28 in the 25 mg and 50 mg cohorts.

With regard to safety in the Phase 2 dose exploration trial, there were a total of 28 participants (19 received nomlabofusp and 9 received placebo). There were no serious adverse events reported. There was one allergic reaction which was considered to be a severe adverse event in the 25 mg cohort that resolved with standard treatment. This participant withdrew from the trial. The most common adverse events reported were mild and moderate injection site reactions which resolved without any intervention and there were no study discontinuations due to injection site reactions. Consistent with findings in our Phase 1 study, nomlabofusp demonstrated quick absorption after subcutaneous administration and had dose proportional increases in exposure.

Participants treated with 50 mg for 14 days daily had frataxin levels in skin cells increase from less than 17% at baseline relative to healthy volunteers, to 33% to 59% of healthy volunteers after 14 days of treatment. Patients treated with placebo showed no increase in their frataxin levels during this period. Additionally, the majority of treated patients in both cohorts with quantifiable levels of frataxin at baseline and day 14 achieve at least a 100% increase in tissue frataxin in skin cells, and at least a 30% increase in tissue frataxin levels in buccal cells. Figures 11 and 14 show a clear dose response and increase from baseline in skin tissue and buccal tissue frataxin levels respectively.

The graph on the left in both Figures 12 and 15 show a dose dependent increase in frataxin levels after 14 days of treatment. With both skin and buccal cells, when dosing is switched to every other day the magnitude of the increase in frataxin levels declines.

The waterfall plots on the right in both Figures 12 and 15 depict the individual changes in frataxin levels from baseline in skin cells and buccal cells at day 14 respectively. Each bar represents an individual patient, with placebo treated participants in grey, the 25 mg cohort in aqua, and the 50 mg cohort in blue. The majority of patients treated with nomlabofusp had significant increases in frataxin levels while placebo patients were basically unchanged. Importantly, there also appears to be a dose response as frataxin levels are notably increased in most of the 50 mg cohort over the 25 mg cohort.

Figure 11.

Only participants with quantifiable levels at baseline and day 14 and day 28 are included in the tables.

Figure 12.

*FXN levels measured via detection of peptide derived from mature FXN; FXN concentrations are normalized to total cellular protein content in each sample. Data represent median and 25th and 75th percentiles. Only participants with quantifiable levels at both baseline and day 14 are included in the figures.

**Median baseline FXN levels in patients were 3.5 pg/µg for the placebo, 3.7 pg/µg for the 25 mg cohort and 2.1 pg/µg for the 50 mg cohort.

Figures 13 and 16 depict how many people had a shift in frataxin levels in skin cells and buccal cells as a percentage of average healthy volunteers after 14 days of treatment. On the left is the 25 mg cohort and on the right is the 50 mg cohort. On the far left of each figure are categories of the percentage of average healthy volunteers. Figures in black to the left of the black vertical line represent patients at baseline. Figures to the right of the black

vertical line represent day 14 frataxin levels as a percentage of average healthy volunteers. In blue are individuals that increase by 25% to 50% and in green are individuals that exceeded 50% of average healthy volunteers.

Figure 13.

Only participants with quantifiable levels at baseline and day 14 are included in the figures.

*% of healthy volunteer FXN level is calculated by dividing each participant's FXN level by the average FXN level (16.34 pg/µg) from the noninterventional healthy volunteer study (N=60).

Figure 14.

Only participants with quantifiable levels at baseline and day 14 and day 28 are included in the tables.

Figure 15.

*FXN levels measured via detection of peptide derived from mature FXN; FXN concentrations are normalized to total cellular protein content in each sample. Data represent median and 25th and 75th percentiles. Only participants with quantifiable levels at both baseline and Day 14 are included in the figures.

**Median baseline FXN level in patients were 2.1 pg/µg for the placebo, 1.8 pg/µg for the 25 mg cohort and 1.6 pg/µg for the 50 mg cohort.

Figure 16.

Only participants with quantifiable levels at baseline and day 14 are included in the figures.

*% of healthy volunteer FXN level is calculated by dividing each participant's FXN level by the average FXN level (8.24 pg/µg) from the noninterventional healthy volunteer study (N=60).

Open Label Extension

In January 2024, we initiated the OLE trial evaluating daily subcutaneous injections of 25 mg of nomlabofusp self-administered or administered by a caregiver, with the first patient dosed in March 2024. Participants who completed treatment in the Phase 2 dose exploration trial, or who previously completed a prior clinical trial of

nomlabofusp are potentially eligible to screen for the OLE. The OLE will evaluate the safety, tolerability, PK, and measures of frataxin levels in peripheral tissues as well as other exploratory PD (lipid profiles and gene expression data) following long-term subcutaneous administration of nomlabofusp. Clinical measures collected during the trial will be compared to data from a matched control arm derived from participants in the Friedreich’s Ataxia Clinical Outcome Measures Study (FACOMS) database. Further dose expansion in the OLE trial will be considered based on safety, tolerability, PK, FXN levels from the 25 mg dose of nomlabofusp in the OLE trial, as well as data from the Phase 2 trial's 50 mg cohort and is contingent on FDA review as part of the partial clinical hold. Initial data from the OLE trial is expected in the fourth quarter of 2024. We also are planning to include in our clinical studies, individuals between the ages of 2 and 17 and are currently in discussions with FDA as to what additional clinical data in adults would inform inclusion of those pediatric individuals in our studies.

Intellectual Property

Our success depends in large part upon our ability to obtain and maintain proprietary protection for our current and future products and technologies, and to operate without infringing the proprietary rights of others. Our policy is to protect our proprietary position by, among other methods, filing for patent applications on inventions that are important to the development and conduct of our business with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and its foreign counterparts. We also intend to rely on regulatory exclusivity (also called data package exclusivity), which is separate and distinct from the protection afforded by patents, to protect our products. We further protect our proprietary information by requiring our employees, consultants, contractors and other advisors to execute nondisclosure and assignment of invention agreements upon commencement of their respective employment or engagement. Agreements with our employees also prevent them from bringing the proprietary rights of third parties to us. In addition, we require confidentiality or service agreements from third parties that receive our confidential information or materials.

As of February 23, 2024, our intellectual property portfolio was composed of numerous international Patent Cooperation Treaty ("PCT"), foreign, and United States non-provisional patent applications, a United States patent and United States provisional patent applications that we own or co-own, and six issued United States patents and additional non-provisional patent applications in the United States and in certain foreign jurisdictions that we license from academic institutions. The issued patents in the United States licensed by us, which include issued patents covering the composition of matter for nomlabofusp and methods for treating FA, have expiration dates between 2024 and 2040 without taking potential patent term extension into consideration. The international and the United States non-provisional patent applications licensed by us relate to composition of matter and methods of use for nomlabofusp.

The additional patent applications we own or co-own which include PCT, foreign and United States non-provisional patent applications a United States patent, and United States provisional patent applications are related to the development of nomlabofusp, including methods of use of nomlabofusp, and to our peptide-delivery platform technology.

A provisional patent application allows for an effective filing date to be established with regard to an invention, but once a provisional patent application is filed, either a corresponding non-provisional patent application or a petition to convert the provisional patent application into a non-provisional patent application must be filed within 12 months or such effective filing date will be lost. If we or our licensor timely files non-provisional patent applications in the United States and in countries outside of the United States with regard to our provisional patent applications and these non-provisional patent applications result in issued patents, such patents are expected to expire in 2044 or 2025, without taking potential patent term adjustment or patent term extension into consideration.

Nomlabofusp is covered by licensed issued patents (composition of matter and methods of use) in the United States which, if properly maintained, will expire in 2024, 2025 and 2040, excluding any patent term extensions that might be available following the grant of marketing authorizations. We also possess an exclusive license to non-provisional applications in the United States and certain countries outside the United States for nomlabofusp (composition of matter and methods of use). If these patent applications in the United States and other countries result in issued patents, those patents would be expected to expire in 2040. This estimated expiration excludes any patent term adjustment that might be available following the grant of the patent and any patent term extensions that might be available following the grant of marketing authorizations. We cannot predict whether the patent applications we and our licensors are currently pursuing will issue as patents in any particular jurisdiction or whether the claims of any issued patents will provide sufficient protection from competitors or other third parties.

Patents extend for varying periods according to the date of patent filing or grant and the legal term of patents in various countries where patent protection is obtained. The actual protection afforded by a patent, which can vary from country to country, depends on the type of patent, the scope of its coverage and the availability of legal remedies in the country.

We also use other forms of protection besides patent protection and regulatory exclusivity, such as trademark, copyright, and trade secret protection, to enhance our intellectual property, particularly where we do not believe patent protection is appropriate or obtainable. We aim to take advantage of all of the intellectual property rights that are available to us and believe that this comprehensive approach will provide us with proprietary exclusive positions for our product candidates, such as nomlabofusp, where available.

In-License Agreements

We are party to a License Agreement dated November 30, 2016 with Wake Forest University Health Sciences ("WFUHS") and a License Agreement dated November 30, 2016, as amended, with Indiana University ("IU"). Such agreements provide for a transferable, worldwide license to certain patent rights regarding technology used by us with respect to the development of nomlabofusp.

In partial consideration for the right and license granted under these agreements, we will pay each of WFUHS and IU a royalty of a low single digit percentage of net sales of licensed products depending on whether there is a valid patent covering such products. As additional consideration for these agreements, we are obligated to pay each of WFUHS and IU certain milestone payments of up to $2.6 million in the aggregate upon the achievement of certain developmental milestones, commencing on the enrollment of the first patient in a Phase 1 clinical trial. We will also pay each of WFUHS and IU sublicensing fees ranging up to a low double-digit percentage of sublicense consideration depending on our achievement of certain regulatory milestones as of the time of receipt of the sublicense consideration. We are also obligated to reimburse WFUHS and IU for patent-related expenses. In the event that we dispute the validity of any of the licensed patents, the royalty rate would be tripled during such dispute. We are also obligated to pay to IU a minimum annual royalty of less than $0.1 million per annum starting in the 2020 calendar year for the term of the agreement.

In the event that we are required to pay IU consideration, then we may deduct 20% of such IU consideration on a dollar-for-dollar basis from the consideration due to WFUHS. In the event that we are required to pay WFUHS consideration, then we may deduct 60% of such WFUHS consideration on a dollar-for-dollar basis from the consideration due to IU.

Competition

The biopharmaceutical industry is characterized by intense and dynamic competition to develop new technologies and proprietary therapies. Any product candidates that we successfully develop into products and commercialize may compete with existing therapies and new therapies that may become available in the future. While we believe that our platform technology, product candidates and scientific expertise in the field of rare diseases provide competitive advantages, we face competition from various sources, including larger and better-funded pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies, as well as from academic institutions, governmental agencies and public and private research institutions. We expect to compete with Biogen’s SKYCLARYSTM (omaveloxolone), which was approved for the treatment of FA in adults and adolescents aged 16 and older by the FDA and the European Commission in February 2023 and February 2024, respectively. Other competitors currently developing therapeutics to treat FA include, but are not limited to Design Therapeutics, Lexeo Therapeutics, Neurocrine Biosciences/Voyager Therapeutics and PTC Therapeutics. Many of our competitors have significantly greater financial, technical and human resources than we do. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated amongst a smaller number of our competitors. Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop or market products or other novel therapies that are more effective, safer or less costly than our product candidates or obtain regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for our product candidates.

Manufacturing and Supply

Nomlabofusp is a biologic fusion protein that is produced in E. coli. We have worked with contract manufacturers to develop, in accordance with cGMPs a manufacturing process and analytical methods for drug substance to support clinical trials. We also use third party manufacturers for the clinical packaging, storage and

distribution of nomlabofusp. We rely on third parties to store the nomlabofusp master cell bank and working cell bank, each stored at a different location. We continue to advance the manufacturing of nomlabofusp, obtain stability data, and produce drug product for future clinical trials. We are continually trying to optimize our manufacturing process to increase yields, decrease costs and increase reliability in supply chains. The final process will need to be successfully scaled up to support commercial manufacturing.

The drug substance which is in frozen liquid form for nomlabofusp is currently manufactured for us by KBI Biopharma, Inc. ("KBI"). We are party to a Master Services Agreement, as amended, with KBI, pursuant to which KBI provides biological development and clinical manufacturing services with respect to nomlabofusp. We currently produce a frozen liquid form of drug product at another manufacturer. We have also begun a program with a third-party manufacturer to produce a lyophilized version of the drug product from the same KBI drug substance, that, once available, we intend to use in certain of our future planned clinical trials and ultimately, commercial use, assuming nomlabofusp receives required regulatory approvals.

Human Capital Resources

Employees and Compensation

In order to achieve the goals and expectations of our Company, it is crucial that we continue to attract and retain top talent. To facilitate talent attraction and retention, we strive to make our company a safe and rewarding workplace, with opportunities for our employees to grow and develop in their careers, supported by strong compensation, benefits, paid time-off and health and wellness programs, including programs that build connections between our employees.

As of December 31, 2023, we employed 42 full-time employees in the United States, of which 32 are directly engaged in research and development with the rest providing administrative, business and operations support. None of our employees are represented by a labor organization or under any collective-bargaining arrangements. We consider our employee relations to be good.

Our human capital resources objectives include, as applicable, identifying, recruiting, retaining, incentivizing and integrating our existing and new employees, advisors and consultants. The principal purposes of our equity and cash incentive plans are to attract, retain and reward personnel through the granting of stock-based and cash-based compensation awards, in order to increase stockholder value and the success of our company by motivating such individuals to perform to the best of their abilities and achieve our objectives.

Diversity and Inclusion

We value the diversity of our employees and take pride in our commitment to diversity and inclusion across all levels of our organizational structure and with respect to our board of directors. We are committed to developing strategies for building diverse teams and promoting the advancement of employees from diverse backgrounds.

Scientific Advisors

We have established a scientific advisory board and we regularly seek advice and input from these experienced thought leaders on matters related to our research and development programs. The members of our scientific advisory board consist of distinguished research scientists, professors and industry experts recognized as key opinion leaders in the fields of rare disease, pediatrics and mitochondrial disease. Their scientific perspectives will be invaluable to determine our strategic scientific pathway and support the development of other potential treatments for complex rare diseases to help fill unmet medical needs in this space. We intend to continue to leverage the broad expertise of our advisors by seeking their counsel on important topics relating to our product development and clinical development programs. Our scientific advisors are not our employees and may have commitments to, or consulting or advisory contracts with, other entities that may limit their availability to us. In addition, our scientific advisors may have arrangements with other companies to assist those companies in developing products or technologies that may compete with ours. All of our scientific advisors are affiliated with other entities and devote only a small portion of their time to us.

Our scientific advisors are set forth in the table below:

Facilities

We lease office and laboratory space, which consists of approximately 8,000 square feet and 1,750 square feet located in Bala Cynwyd, PA and Philadelphia, PA, respectively. We are currently on a month-to-month lease on this Philadelphia lab space. We, as well as our landlord, can terminate the lease with four months notice.

We have entered into a lease for 3,927 square feet of new laboratory space in King of Prussia, PA to replace the Philadelphia lab space, but this lease has not yet commenced with expected occupancy in the second quarter of 2024.As part of the Merger (as defined below) with Zafgen, Inc ("Zafgen"), we acquired a non-cancellable operating lease for approximately 17,705 square feet of office space at 3 Center Plaza, Boston, Massachusetts (the "Boston Lease"). The Boston Lease expires on October 30, 2029. On October 27, 2020, we entered into a sublease agreement whereby we subleased all 17,705 square feet of office space leased under the Boston Lease until October 30, 2029.

Legal Proceedings

From time to time, we may become involved in legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of our business. We are not presently a party to any legal proceedings that, if determined adversely to us, would individually or taken together have a material adverse effect on us.

Corporate Information

We were founded in 2005 as a Delaware corporation under the name Zafgen, Inc. ("Zafgen"). On May 28, 2020, Zafgen completed a reverse merger with Chondrial Therapeutics, Inc. ("Chondrial") in accordance with the terms of the Agreement and Plan of Merger and Reorganization, dated December 17, 2019, by and among Zafgen, Zordich Merger Sub, Inc., Chondrial and Chondrial Therapeutics Holdings, LLC, pursuant to which Zordich Merger Sub, Inc. merged with and into Chondrial, with Chondrial surviving as our wholly owned subsidiary. Following completion of the merger, Zafgen, Inc. changed its name to Larimar Therapeutics, Inc.

Our principal executive offices are located at Three Bala Plaza East, Suite 506, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004, and our telephone number is (844) 511-9056. Our website address is www.larimartx.com. The information on, or that can be accessed through, our website is not part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and is not incorporated by reference herein. We have included our website address as an inactive textual reference only.

Available Information

We file annual, quarterly, and current reports, proxy statements, and other documents with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("the SEC") under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended ("the Exchange Act"). The SEC maintains an internet website, www.sec.gov, that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers, including us, that file electronically with the SEC.

Copies of each of our filings with the SEC on Form 10-K, Form 10-Q and Form 8-K and all amendments to those reports, can be viewed and downloaded free of charge at our website, www.larimartx.com as soon as reasonably practicable after the reports and amendments are electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC.

Our code of ethics, other corporate policies and procedures, and the charters of our Audit Committee, Compensation Committee and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee are available through our website

at www.larimartx.com. We intend to post information regarding any amendments to, or waivers from, our code of ethics on our website.

Government Regulation

In the United States, drug and biologic products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA. The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”) and other federal and state statutes and regulations, govern, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, storage, recordkeeping, approval, labeling, promotion and marketing, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, sampling, and import and export of pharmaceutical products. Biological products used for the prevention, treatment, or cure of a disease or condition of a human being are subject to regulation under the FDCA, with the exception that the section of the FDCA that governs the approval of drugs via new drug applications (“NDAs”), does not apply to the approval of biologics. In contrast, biologics are approved for marketing under provisions of the Public Health Service Act (“PHS Act”), via a Biologics License Application (“BLA”). However, the application process and requirements for approval of BLAs are very similar to those for NDAs. FDA approval or licensure also must be obtained before the marketing of drug and biological products. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources.

U.S. Development Process

The process required by the FDA before a drug or biologic product may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:

Before testing any drug or biological product candidate in humans, the product candidate enters the non-clinical testing stage. Non-clinical tests include laboratory evaluations of product chemistry, pharmacology, toxicity

and formulation, as well as animal studies to assess the potential safety and activity of the product candidate. The conduct of the non-clinical tests must comply with federal regulations and requirements including GLPs.

The clinical study sponsor must submit the results of the non-clinical tests, together with manufacturing information, analytical data, any available clinical data or literature and a proposed clinical protocol, to the FDA as part of the IND. Some non-clinical testing typically continues after the IND is submitted. An IND is an exemption from the FDCA that allows an unapproved product to be shipped in interstate commerce for use in an investigational clinical trial and a request for FDA authorization to administer an investigational product to humans. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA places the clinical trial on a clinical hold within that 30-day time period. In such a case, the IND sponsor must resolve any deficiencies to the satisfaction of the FDA, and the FDA must lift the clinical hold before the clinical trial can begin. The FDA may also impose clinical holds on a drug or biological product candidate at any time before or during clinical trials due to safety concerns or non-compliance. If the FDA imposes a clinical hold, trials may not recommence without FDA authorization and then only under terms authorized by the FDA.

Clinical trials may involve the administration of the drug or biological product candidate to healthy volunteers or subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators, generally physicians not employed by or under the study sponsor’s control. Clinical trials involving some products for certain diseases, including some rare diseases may begin with testing in patients with the disease. Clinical trials are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the clinical trial, dosing procedures, subject selection and exclusion criteria, and the parameters to be used to monitor subject safety, including stopping rules that assure a clinical trial will be stopped if certain adverse events should occur. Each protocol and any amendments to the protocol must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND application. Clinical trials must be conducted and monitored in accordance with the FDA’s regulations comprising the GCP requirements, including the requirement that all research subjects or his or her legal representative provide informed consent. Further, each clinical trial must be reviewed and approved by an independent IRB, at or servicing each institution at which the clinical trial will be conducted. An IRB is charged with protecting the welfare and rights of study participants and considers such items as whether the risks to individuals participating in the clinical trials are minimized and are reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits. The IRB also approves the form and content of the informed consent that must be signed by each clinical trial subject or his or her legal representative and must monitor the clinical trial until completed. Additionally, some trials are overseen by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the trial sponsor, known as a data monitoring committee. The data monitoring committee may review safety data and/or efficacy data.

Human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap or be combined:

An OLE study may also be conducted. An OLE study typically enrolls participants from previous clinical trials and is designed to gather the long-term safety and tolerability data on a potential new medicine beyond the time period of the original studies.

Post-approval clinical trials, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 clinical trials, may be conducted after initial marketing approval. These clinical trials are used to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication in real-world scenarios. They provide additional information regarding risks, benefits and best use, including longer term safety data. In certain instances, the FDA may mandate the performance of Phase 4 clinical trials as a condition of approval of an NDA or BLA.

During all phases of clinical development, regulatory agencies require extensive monitoring and auditing of all clinical activities, clinical data, and clinical trial investigators. Annual progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials must be submitted to the FDA. Written IND safety reports must be promptly submitted to the FDA and the investigators for serious and unexpected adverse events, any findings from other studies, tests in laboratory animals or in vitro testing that suggest a significant risk for human subjects, or any clinically important increase in the rate of a serious suspected adverse reactions over that listed in the protocol or investigator brochure. The sponsor must submit an IND safety report within 15 calendar days after the sponsor determines that the information qualifies for reporting. The sponsor also must notify the FDA of any unexpected fatal or life-threatening suspected adverse reaction within seven calendar days after the sponsor’s initial receipt of the information. The FDA or the sponsor or its data safety monitoring board may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research subjects or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an IRB can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical trial at its institution if the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements or if the drug or biological product has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients.

Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional animal studies and must also develop additional information about the physical characteristics of the drug or biological product as well as finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. To help reduce the risk of the introduction of adventitious agents with use of biological products, the PHS Act emphasizes the importance of manufacturing control for products whose attributes cannot be precisely defined. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and, among other things, the sponsor must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality potency and purity of the final biological product. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested, and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the drug or biological product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life.

There are also various laws and regulations regarding laboratory practices, the experimental use of animals, and the use and disposal of hazardous or potentially hazardous substances in connection with the research. In each of these areas, the FDA and other regulatory authorities have broad regulatory and enforcement powers, including the ability to levy fines and civil penalties, suspend or delay issuance of approvals, seize or recall products, and withdraw approvals.

Information about certain clinical trials must be submitted within specific timeframes to the NIH for public dissemination on its clinicaltrials.gov website. Sponsors or distributors of investigational products for the diagnosis, monitoring, or treatment of one or more serious diseases or conditions must also have a publicly available policy on evaluating and responding to requests for expanded access requests.

U.S. Review and Approval Processes

After the completion of clinical trials of a drug or biological product, FDA approval of an NDA, or BLA, must be obtained before commercial marketing of the product. The NDA or BLA must include results of product development, laboratory and animal studies, human studies, information on the manufacture and composition of the product, proposed labeling and other relevant information.

Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, as amended, ("PDUFA") each NDA or BLA may be accompanied by a significant application fee. The applicant for an approved application is also subject to an annual program fee. Fee waivers or reductions are available in certain circumstances, including a waiver of the application fee for the first application filed by a small business. Additionally, no user fees are assessed on NDAs or BLAs for product candidates designated as orphan drugs, unless the product candidate also includes a non-orphan indication.

Within 60 days following submission of the application, the FDA reviews an NDA or BLA submitted to determine if it is substantially complete before the agency files it. The FDA may refuse to file any NDA or BLA that it deems incomplete or not properly reviewable at the time of submission and may request additional information. In this event, the NDA or BLA must be resubmitted with the additional information. The resubmitted application is

also subject to review before the FDA files it. Once the submission is filed, the FDA begins an in-depth substantive review of the NDA or BLA. The FDA reviews the NDA or BLA to determine, among other things, whether the proposed product is safe and effective (for drugs) or safe, potent, and effective (for biologics), for its intended use, and has an acceptable purity profile, and whether the product is being manufactured in accordance with cGMPs to assure and preserve the product’s identity, safety, strength, quality, potency and purity. One of the performance goals agreed to by the FDA under the PDUFA is to review standard NDAs or BLAs in ten months from filing and priority NDAs or BLAs in six months from filing, whereupon a review decision is to be made. The review process may be extended by three months if the FDA classifies a response to an FDA request for additional information or clarification as a major amendment.

The FDA may refer applications for novel products or products that present difficult questions of safety or efficacy to an advisory committee, typically a panel that includes clinicians and other experts, for review, evaluation and a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and under what conditions. The FDA is not bound by the recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations carefully when making decisions. During the review, the FDA will also determine whether a REMS is necessary to assure the safe use of the biological product. If the FDA concludes a REMS is needed, the sponsor of the NDA or BLA must submit a proposed REMS; the FDA will not approve the NDA or BLA without a REMS, if required.

Before approving an NDA or BLA, the FDA may inspect the facilities at which the product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve the product unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with cGMP requirements and adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. Additionally, before approving an NDA or BLA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical trial sites to assure that the clinical trials were conducted in compliance with IND study requirements and GCP requirements. To assure cGMP and GCP compliance, an applicant must incur significant expenditure of time, money and effort in the areas of training, record keeping, production, and quality control.

Notwithstanding the submission of relevant data and information, the FDA may ultimately decide that the NDA or BLA does not satisfy its regulatory criteria for approval and deny approval. Data obtained from clinical trials are not always conclusive and the FDA may interpret data differently than the sponsor interprets the same data. If the agency decides not to approve the NDA or BLA in its present form, the FDA will issue a complete response letter that usually describes all of the specific deficiencies in the NDA or BLA identified by the FDA. The deficiencies identified may be minor, for example, requiring labeling changes, or major, for example, requiring additional clinical trials. Additionally, the complete response letter may include recommended actions that the applicant might take to place the application in a condition for approval. If a complete response letter is issued, the applicant may either resubmit the NDA or BLA, addressing all of the deficiencies identified in the letter, or withdraw the application.

If a product receives regulatory approval, the approval may be significantly limited to specific diseases and dosages or the indications for use may otherwise be limited, which could restrict the commercial value of the product. Further, the FDA may require that certain contraindications, warnings or precautions be included in the product labeling. The FDA may impose restrictions and conditions on product distribution, prescribing, or dispensing in the form of a risk management plan, or otherwise limit the scope of any approval. In addition, the FDA may require post marketing clinical trials, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 clinical trials, designed to further assess a drug or biological product’s safety and effectiveness, and testing and surveillance programs to monitor the safety of approved products that have been commercialized. As a condition for approval, the FDA may also require additional non-clinical testing as a Phase 4 commitment.

Post-Approval Requirements

Maintaining substantial compliance with applicable federal, state, and local statutes and regulations requires the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Rigorous and extensive FDA regulation of drug and biological products continues after approval, particularly with respect to cGMP. We will rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the production of clinical and commercial quantities of any products that we may commercialize. Manufacturers of our products are required to comply with applicable requirements in the cGMP regulations, including quality control and quality assurance and maintenance of records and documentation.

Following approval, the manufacturing facilities are subject to periodic inspections by the FDA and such inspections may result in an issuance of FDA Form 483 deficiency observations, untitled letter, or a warning letter, which can lead to plant shutdown and other more serious penalties and fines. Prior to the institution of any manufacturing changes, a determination needs to be made whether FDA approval is required in advance. If not done

in accordance with FDA expectations, the FDA may restrict supply and may take further action. Annual product reports are required to be submitted annually. Other post-approval requirements applicable to drug and biological products, include reporting of cGMP deviations that may affect the identity, potency, purity and overall safety of a distributed product, record-keeping requirements, reporting of adverse events, reporting updated safety and efficacy information, and complying with electronic record and signature requirements.

After an NDA or BLA is approved, the product may also be subject to official lot release. As part of the manufacturing process, the manufacturer is required to perform certain tests on each lot of the product before it is released for distribution. If the product is subject to official release by the FDA, the manufacturer submits samples of each lot of product to the FDA together with a release protocol showing a summary of the history of manufacture of the lot and the results of all of the manufacturer’s tests performed on the lot. The FDA may also perform certain confirmatory tests on lots of some products, before releasing the lots for distribution by the manufacturer. In addition, the FDA may conduct laboratory research related to the regulatory standards on the safety, purity, potency, and effectiveness of drug and biological products. Systems need to be put in place to record and evaluate adverse events reported by health care providers and patients and to assess product complaints. An increase in severity or new adverse events can result in labeling changes or product recall. Defects in manufacturing of commercial products can result in product recalls.

Manufacturers must also comply with the FDA’s advertising and promotion requirements, such as those related to direct-to-consumer advertising, the prohibition on promoting products for uses or in patient populations that are not described in the product’s approved labeling (known as “off-label use”), industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities, and promotional activities involving the internet. Discovery of previously unknown problems or the failure to comply with the applicable regulatory requirements may result in restrictions on the marketing of a product or withdrawal of the product from the market as well as possible civil or criminal sanctions. Failure to comply with the applicable U.S. requirements at any time during the product development process, approval process or after approval, may subject an applicant or manufacturer to administrative or judicial civil or criminal sanctions and adverse publicity. FDA sanctions could include refusal to approve pending applications, withdrawal of an approval or license revocation, clinical hold, warning or untitled letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, mandated corrective advertising or communications with doctors, debarment, restitution, disgorgement of profits, or civil or criminal penalties. Any agency or judicial enforcement action could have a material adverse effect.

Drug and biologic product manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved drug and biological products are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with cGMPs and other laws. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money, and effort in the areas of production and quality control to maintain cGMP compliance. Discovery of problems with a product after approval may result in restrictions on a product, manufacturer, or holder of an approved NDA or BLA, including withdrawal of the product from the market. In addition, changes to the manufacturing process or facility generally require prior FDA approval before being implemented and other types of changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications and additional labeling claims, are also subject to further FDA review and approval.

Orphan Drug Designation

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant Orphan Drug Designation ("ODD") to a drug or biologic product intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or more than 200,000 individuals in the United States and for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making a drug or biologic product available in the United States for this type of disease or condition will be recovered from sales of the product. ODD must be requested before submitting an NDA or BLA. After the FDA grants ODD, the identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. ODD does not convey any advantage in or shorten the duration of the regulatory review and approval process.

If a product that has ODD receives the first FDA approval for the disease or condition for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan product exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications to market the same drug or biological product for the same indication for seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as showing clinical superiority to the product with orphan exclusivity by means of greater effectiveness, greater safety or providing a major contribution to patient care or in instances of drug supply issues. Competitors, however, may receive approval of either a different product for the same indication or the same

product for a different indication but that could be used off-label in the orphan indication. Orphan drug exclusivity also could block the approval of our products for seven years if a competitor obtains approval before we do for the same product as defined by the FDA for the same indication we are seeking approval, or if our product is determined to be contained within the competitor’s scope of product for the same indication or disease. If we pursue marketing approval for an indication broader than the orphan drug designation we have received, we may not be entitled to orphan drug exclusivity.

Expedited Review and Approval Programs

The FDA has various programs, including fast track designation, priority review, accelerated approval, and breakthrough therapy designation, that are intended to expedite or simplify the process for the development and FDA review of drug and biological products that are intended for the treatment of serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions and demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs. The purpose of these programs is to provide important new drug and biological products to patients earlier than under standard FDA review procedures. To be eligible for a fast track designation, the FDA must determine, based on the request of a sponsor, that a drug or biological product is intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and demonstrates the potential to address an unmet medical need. The FDA will determine that a product will fill an unmet medical need if it will provide a therapy where none exists or provide a therapy that may be potentially superior to existing therapy based on efficacy or safety factors. In addition to other benefits, such as the ability to have greater interactions with the FDA, the FDA may initiate review of sections of a fast track NDA or BLA before the application is complete, a process known as rolling review.

The FDA may give a priority review designation to drug or biological products that treat a serious condition and, if approved, would provide a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness. A priority review means that the goal for the FDA to review an application is six months, rather than the standard review of ten months under current PDUFA guidelines. Most products that are eligible for fast track designation may also be considered appropriate to receive a priority review.

In addition, drug and biological products studied for their safety and effectiveness in treating serious or life-threatening illnesses and that provide meaningful therapeutic benefit over existing treatments may be approved on the basis of adequate and well-controlled clinical trials establishing that the drug or biological product has an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality, that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit, taking into account the severity, rarity or prevalence of the condition and the availability or lack of alternative treatments. As a condition of approval, the FDA may require a sponsor of a drug or biological product receiving accelerated approval to perform post-marketing studies with due diligence to verify and describe the predicted effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical endpoint, and the drug or biological product may be subject to accelerated withdrawal procedures.

The Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act (“FDORA”) was recently enacted, which included provisions related to the accelerated approval pathway. Pursuant to FDORA, the FDA is authorized to require a post-approval study to be underway prior to approval or within a specified time period following approval. FDORA also requires the FDA to specify conditions of any required post-approval study, which may include milestones such as a target date of study completion and requires sponsors to submit progress reports for required post-approval studies and any conditions required by the FDA not later than 180 days following approval and not less frequently than every 180 days thereafter until completion or termination of the study. FDORA also provides the FDA increased authority for expedited procedures to withdraw approval of a drug or biologic or indication approved under accelerated approval if, for example, the confirmatory trial fails to verify the predicted clinical benefit of the product. FDORA also enables the FDA to initiate enforcement actions for the failure to conduct with due diligence a required post-approval study, including a failure to meet any required conditions specified by the FDA or to submit timely reports. In addition, the FDA generally requires, unless otherwise informed by the agency, pre-approval of promotional materials, which could adversely impact the timing of the commercial launch of the product.

Moreover, a sponsor can request designation of a product candidate as a “breakthrough therapy.” A breakthrough therapy is defined as a drug or biologic product that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug or biologic product may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development.

The FDA must take certain actions, such as holding timely meetings and providing advice, intended to expedite the development and review of an application for approval of a breakthrough therapy.

Even if a product qualifies for one or more of these programs, the FDA may later decide that the product no longer meets the conditions for qualification or decide that the time period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened. Furthermore, fast-track designation, priority review, accelerated approval and breakthrough therapy designation, do not change the standards for approval and may not ultimately expedite the development or approval process.

Rare Pediatric Disease Vouchers

The Rare Pediatric Disease Voucher Program is intended to encourage development of new drug and biological products for prevention and treatment of certain rare pediatric diseases. Although there are existing incentive programs to encourage the development and study of drugs and biologics for rare diseases, pediatric populations, and unmet medical needs, this program provides an additional incentive for the development of drugs and biologics for rare pediatric diseases, which may be used alone or in combination with other incentive programs. A rare pediatric disease is defined as a disease that is a serious or life-threatening disease in which the serious or life-threatening manifestations primarily affect individuals aged from birth to 18 years, including age groups often called neonates, infants, children, and adolescents; and is a rare disease or condition as defined in the FDCA, which includes diseases and conditions that affect fewer than 200,000 persons in the United States and diseases and conditions that affect a larger number of persons and for which there is no reasonable expectation that the costs of developing and making available the product in the United States can be recovered from sales of the product in the United States.

The sponsor of an application for a drug product that obtains rare pediatric disease designation may be eligible for a voucher that can be used or sold to obtain a priority review for a subsequent application submitted under section 505(b)(1) of the FDCA or section 351 of the PHS Act. A rare pediatric disease drug product must meet certain eligibility requirements for a priority voucher at the time the sponsor seeks approval. The rare pediatric disease priority review voucher program was most recently re-authorized by Congress through September 30, 2024, with the potential for priority review vouchers to be granted through September 30, 2026.

Pediatric Information and Pediatric Exclusivity

Under the Pediatric Research Equity Act (“PREA”), certain NDAs and BLAs and certain supplements to an NDA or BLA must contain data to assess the safety and efficacy of the drug for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe and effective. The FDA may grant deferrals for submission of pediatric data or full or partial waivers. A sponsor who is planning to submit a marketing application for a drug that includes a new active ingredient, new indication, new dosage form, new dosing regimen or new route of administration must submit an initial Pediatric Study Plan (“PSP”) within 60 days of an end-of-Phase 2 meeting or, if there is no such meeting, as early as practicable before the initiation of the Phase 3 or Phase 2/3 study. The initial PSP must include an outline of the pediatric study or studies that the sponsor plans to conduct, including study objectives and design, age groups, relevant endpoints and statistical approach, or a justification for not including such detailed information, and any request for a deferral of pediatric assessments or a full or partial waiver of the requirement to provide data from pediatric studies along with supporting information. The FDA and the sponsor must reach an agreement on the PSP. A sponsor can submit amendments to an agreed-upon initial PSP at any time if changes to the pediatric plan need to be considered based on data collected from preclinical studies, early phase clinical trials and/or other clinical development programs.

Under the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act (“BPCA”), a drug or biologic product can also obtain pediatric market exclusivity in the United States. Pediatric exclusivity, if granted, adds six months to existing exclusivity periods for all formulations, dosage forms, and indications of the active moiety and patent terms for drugs and six months to exclusivity periods for all formulations, dosage forms, and indications for biologic products. This six-month exclusivity, which runs from the end of other exclusivity protection or patent term, may be granted based on the voluntary completion of a pediatric study in accordance with an FDA-issued “Written Request” for such a study, provided that at the time pediatric exclusivity is granted there is not less than nine months of term remaining.

Biosimilars

The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 ("BPCIA") created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are demonstrated to be "biosimilar" or "interchangeable" with an FDA-licensed reference biological product via an approved BLA. Biosimilarity to an approved reference product requires that there be no differences in conditions of use, route of administration, dosage form, and strength, and no clinically meaningful differences between the biological product and the reference product in terms of safety, purity, and potency. Biosimilarity is demonstrated in steps beginning with rigorous analytical studies or "fingerprinting", in vitro studies, in vivo animal studies, and generally at least one clinical study, absent a waiver from the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS"). The biosimilarity exercise tests the hypothesis that the investigational product and the reference product are the same. If at any point in the stepwise biosimilarity process a significant difference is observed, then the products are not biosimilar, and the development of a stand-alone BLA is necessary. In order to meet the higher hurdle of interchangeability, a sponsor must demonstrate that the biosimilar product can be expected to produce the same clinical result as the reference product, and for a product that is administered more than once, that the risk of switching between the reference product and biosimilar product is not greater than the risk of maintaining the patient on the reference product. Complexities associated with the larger, and often more complex, structures of biological products, as well as the process by which such products are manufactured, pose significant hurdles to implementation that are still being evaluated by the FDA. Under the BPCIA, a reference biologic is granted 12 years of exclusivity from the time of first licensure or BLA approval, of the reference product, and no application for a biosimilar can be submitted for four years from the date of licensure of the reference product. The first biologic product submitted under the biosimilar abbreviated approval pathway that is determined to be interchangeable with the reference product has exclusivity against a finding of interchangeability for other biologics for the same condition of use for the lesser of (i) one year after first commercial marketing of the first interchangeable biosimilar, (ii) 18 months after the first interchangeable biosimilar is approved if there is no patent challenge, (iii) 18 months after resolution of a lawsuit over the patents of the reference biologic in favor of the first interchangeable biosimilar applicant, or (iv) 42 months after the first interchangeable biosimilar is approved if a patent lawsuit is ongoing within the 42-month period.

Regulation Outside of the United States

In addition to regulations in the United States, we are subject to a variety of regulations in other jurisdictions governing clinical studies, commercial sales, and distribution of our products. Most countries outside of the United States require that clinical trial applications be submitted to and approved by the local regulatory authority for each clinical study. In the European Union, for example, an application must be submitted to the national competent authority and an independent ethics committee in each country in which we intend to conduct clinical trials, much like the FDA and IRB, respectively. Under the Clinical Trials Regulation (EU) No 536/2014, which replaced the Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC on January 31, 2022, a single application is now made through the Clinical Trials Information System (“CTIS”), for clinical trial authorization in up to 30 European Union/European Economic Area ("EU/EEA") countries at the same time and with a single set of documentation.

The assessment of applications for clinical trials is divided into two parts (Part I contains scientific and medicinal product documentation and Part II contains the national and patient-level documentation). Part I is assessed by a coordinated review by the competent authorities of all European Union Member States in which an application for authorization of a clinical trial has been submitted (Member States concerned) of a draft report prepared by a Reference Member State. Part II is assessed separately by each Member State concerned. The role of the relevant ethics committees in the assessment procedure will continue to be governed by the national law of the Member State concerned, however overall related timelines are defined by the Clinical Trials Regulation. The new Clinical Trials Regulation also provides for simplified reporting procedures for clinical trial sponsors.

In addition, whether or not we obtain FDA approval for a product, we must obtain approval of a product by the comparable regulatory authorities of countries outside the U.S. before we can commence clinical studies or marketing of the product in those countries. The approval process and requirements vary from country to country, so the number and type of non-clinical, clinical, and manufacturing studies needed may differ, and the time may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA approval.

To obtain regulatory approval of a product under the European Union's regulatory system, we submit a Marketing Authorization Application ("MAA"), to be assessed in the centralized procedure. The centralized procedure allows applicants to obtain a marketing authorization ("MA") that is valid throughout the European Union and the additional Member States of the European Area (Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway) ("EEA"). It is

compulsory for medicinal products manufactured using biotechnological processes, for orphan medicinal products, for advance therapy medicinal products (gene-therapy, somatic cell-therapy or tissue-engineered medicines) and for human products containing a new active substance which are not authorized in the European Union and which are intended for the treatment of HIV, AIDS, cancer, neurodegenerative disorders, auto-immune and other immune dysfunctions, viral diseases or diabetes. The centralized procedure is optional for any other products containing new active substances not authorized in the European Union or for products which constitute a significant therapeutic, scientific or technical innovation or for which a centralized authorization is in the interests of patients in the European Union. When a company wishes to place on the market a medicinal product that is eligible for the centralized procedure, it sends an application directly to the EMA, to be assessed by the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use ("CHMP"). The CHMP is responsible for conducting the assessment of whether a medicine meets the required quality, safety and efficacy requirements, and whether the product has a positive risk/benefit/risk profile. Full copies of the MAA are sent to a rapporteur and a co-rapporteur designated by the competent EMA scientific committee. They coordinate the EMA's scientific assessment of the medicinal product and prepare draft reports. Once the draft reports are prepared (other experts might be called upon for this purpose), they are sent to the CHMP, whose comments or objections are communicated to the applicant.

The rapporteur and co-rapporteur then assess the applicant's replies, submit them for discussion to the CHMP and, taking into account the conclusions of this debate, prepare a final assessment report. Once the evaluation is completed, the CHMP gives a favorable or unfavorable opinion as to whether to grant the authorization. When the opinion is favorable, it shall include the draft summary of the product's characteristics, the package leaflet and the texts proposed for the various packaging materials. The time limit for the evaluation procedure is 210 days (excluding clock stops, when additional written or oral information is to be provided by the applicant in response to questions asked by the CHMP). The EMA then has fifteen days to forward its opinion to the European Commission which will make a binding decision on the grant of an MA within 67 days of the receipt of the CHMP.

The European Commission has fifteen days to prepare a draft decision. The medicinal product is assigned an EU registration number, which will be placed on its packaging if the MA is granted. During this period, various European Commission directorates-general are consulted on the draft MA decision. There are two other procedures in the European Union for the grant of an MAA in multiple European Union Member States. The decentralized procedure provides for approval by one or more other, or concerned, Member States of an assessment of an application performed by one member state, known as the Reference Member State. Under this procedure, an applicant submits an application, or dossier, and related materials including a draft summary of product characteristics, and draft labeling and package leaflet, to the Reference Member State and Concerned Member States. The Reference Member State prepares a draft assessment and drafts of the related materials within 120 days after receipt of a valid application. Within 90 days of receiving the reference member state's assessment report, each Concerned Member State must decide whether to approve the assessment report and related materials. If a member state cannot approve the assessment report and related materials on the grounds of potential serious risk to the public health, the disputed points may eventually be referred to the European Commission, whose decision is binding on all member states. Where a product has already received an MA in one Member State, another Member State can recognize that MA under the mutual recognition procedure.

Regulation (EC) No. 141/2000, as amended, provides that a product may be designated as an orphan medicinal product if its sponsor can establish that it is intended for the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of life-threatening or chronically debilitating conditions that affect not more than 5 in 10,000 persons in the European Union when the application is made. In addition, orphan designation can be granted if the product is intended for a life threatening, seriously debilitating, or serious and chronic condition in the European Union where without incentives derived from orphan designation.it is unlikely that sales of the product in the European Union would be sufficient to justify the necessary investment in its development. Orphan designation is only available if there is no other satisfactory method approved in the European Union of diagnosing, preventing, or treating the condition, or if such a method exists, the proposed orphan product will be of significant benefit to patients over the existing options. We have obtained orphan drug in the European Union for nomlabofusp.

Orphan designation provides opportunities for fee reductions, protocol assistance and access to the centralized procedure in the European Union. Fee reductions are not limited to the first year after an MA for small and medium enterprises. In addition, if a product which has an orphan designation subsequently receives a centralized MA for the indication for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan market exclusivity, which means the regulatory authorities in the European Union may not approve any other application to market a "similar medicinal product" similar drug for the same indication for a period of 10 years. A “similar medicinal product” is defined as a

medicinal product containing a similar active substance or substances as contained in an authorized orphan medicinal product, and which is intended for the same therapeutic indication. The exclusivity period may be reduced to six years if the designation criteria are no longer met, including where it is shown that the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity. Additionally, an MA may be granted to a similar medicinal product for the same indication if:

The EMA offers a scheme to facilitate development of product candidates in indications, often rare, for which few or no therapies currently exist. The PRIority MEdicines, or PRIME, scheme is intended to encourage drug development in areas of unmet medical need and is intended to reinforce early dialogue with, and regulatory support from, EMA in order to stimulate innovation, optimize development and enable accelerated assessment of such product candidates. It is intended to build upon the scientific advice scheme and accelerated assessment procedure offered by the EMA. The scheme is voluntary and eligibility criteria must be met for a medicine to qualify for PRIME.

The PRIME scheme is open to medicines under development and for which the applicant intends to apply for an MA through the centralized procedure. Eligible products must target conditions for which there is an unmet medical need (there is no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment in the European Union or, if there is, the new medicine will bring a major therapeutic advantage) and they must demonstrate the potential to address the unmet medical need by introducing new methods or therapy or improving existing ones. Applicants will typically be at the exploratory clinical trial phase of development and will have preliminary clinical evidence in patients to demonstrate the promising activity of the medicine and its potential to address to a significant extent an unmet medical need. In exceptional cases, applicants from the academic sector or SMEs (small and medium sized enterprises) may submit an eligibility request at an earlier stage of development if compelling non-clinical data in a relevant model provide early evidence of promising activity to establish proof of principle, and first in man studies indicate adequate exposure for the desired pharmacotherapeutic effects and tolerability.

If a medicine is selected for the PRIME scheme, EMA:

For SMEs who enter the scheme based on data showing proof of principle, the appointment of the rapporteur occurs once they have generated data confirming eligibility at proof of concept stage. They are required to submit relevant data and justification as the product development reaches this stage.

Medicines that are selected for the PRIME scheme are also expected to benefit from EMA’s accelerated assessment procedure at the time of application for marketing authorization. Where, during the course of development, a medicine no longer meets the eligibility criteria, support under the PRIME scheme may be withdrawn.

A Pediatric Investigation Plan ("PIP") in the European Union is aimed at ensuring that the necessary data are obtained to support the authorization of a medicine for children, through studies in children. All applications for marketing authorization for new medicines have to include the results of studies as described in an agreed PIP, unless the study results are deferred, or the medicine is exempt because of a waiver. This requirement also applies when a marketing-authorization holder wants to add a new indication, pharmaceutical form, or route of

administration for a medicine that is already authorized and covered by intellectual property rights. Several rewards and incentives for the development of pediatric medicines for children are available in the E.U. Medicines authorized across the E.U. with the results of studies from a PIP included in the product information are eligible for an extension of their supplementary protection certificate by six months. This is the case even when the studies’ results are negative. For orphan medicines, the incentive is an additional two years of market exclusivity. Scientific advice and protocol assistance at the Agency are free of charge for questions relating to the development of pediatric medicines.

The aforementioned European Union rules are generally applicable in the EEA.

The UK left the European Union on January 31, 2020 and the UK and the European Union concluded a trade and cooperation agreement (“TCA”), which was provisionally applicable since January 1, 2021 and has been formally applicable since May 1, 2021. The TCA includes specific provisions concerning pharmaceuticals, which include the mutual recognition of cGMP, inspections of manufacturing facilities for medicinal products and cGMP documents issued, but does not provide for wholesale mutual recognition of UK and European Union pharmaceutical regulations. At present, Great Britain has implemented European Union legislation on the marketing, promotion and sale of medicinal products through the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 (as amended) (under the Northern Ireland Protocol, the European Union regulatory framework continues to apply in Northern Ireland). Except in respect of the new European Union Clinical Trials Regulation, the regulatory regime in Great Britain therefore largely aligns with current European Union medicines regulations, however it is possible that these regimes will diverge more significantly in future now that Great Britain’s regulatory system is independent from the European Union and the TCA does not provide for mutual recognition of UK and European Union pharmaceutical legislation. However, notwithstanding that there is no wholesale recognition of European Union pharmaceutical legislation under the TCA, under the new framework mentioned below which will be put in place by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (“MHRA”), the UK’s medicines regulator, from January 1, 2024, the MHRA has stated that it will take into account decisions on the approval of MAs from the EMA (and certain other regulators) when considering an application for a Great Britain MA. On February 27, 2023, the UK government and the European Commission announced a political agreement in principle to replace the Northern Ireland Protocol with a new set of arrangements, known as the “Windsor Framework”. This new framework fundamentally changes the existing system under the Northern Ireland Protocol, including with respect to the regulation of medicinal products in the UK. In particular, the MHRA will be responsible for approving all medicinal products destined for the UK market (Great Britain and Northern Ireland), and the EMA will no longer have any role in approving medicinal products destined for Northern Ireland. Once the Windsor Framework is approved by the EU-UK Joint Committee, the UK Government and the European Union will enact legislative measures to enact it into law. The MHRA has introduced changes to national licensing procedures, including procedures to prioritize access to new medicines that will benefit patients, an accelerated assessment procedure and new routes of evaluation for novel products and biotechnological products. All existing E.U. MAs for centrally authorized products were automatically converted (grand fathered) into UK MAs free-of-charge on January 1, 2021. For a period of three years from January 1, 2021, the MHRA may rely on a decision taken by the European Commission on the approval of a new MA in the centralized procedure, in order to more quickly grant a new Great Britain MA. A separate application will, however, still be required. On January 24, 2023, the MHRA announced that a new international recognition framework will be put in place from January 1, 2024, which will have regard to decisions on the approval of MAs made by the EMA and certain other regulators when determining an application for a new Great Britain MA.

There is now no pre-marketing authorization orphan designation in Great Britain. Instead, the MHRA will review applications for orphan designation in parallel to the corresponding MA application. The criteria are essentially the same, but have been tailored for the GB market, i.e. the prevalence of the condition in GB (rather than the EU) must not be more than 5 in 10,000. Should an orphan designation be granted, the period or market exclusivity will be set from the date of first approval of the product in GB or EU/European Economic Area, wherever is earliest.

We may also apply for access to the UK’s Innovative Licensing and Access Pathway (“ILAP”) which aims to accelerate the time to market and facilitate patient access to certain types of medicinal products in development which target a life-threatening or seriously debilitating condition, or where there is a significant patient or public health need in the UK. To access the ILAP, an applicant applies for an Innovation Passport designation. Once an Innovation Passport designation is granted, the MHRA and its partner agencies (including The All Wales Therapeutics and Toxicology Centre, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and the Scottish Medicines Consortium) will work with the Innovation Passport designee to define a Target Development Profile, (“TDP”). The

TDP sets out a unique product-specific roadmap towards patient access in the UK and provides access to a toolkit to support all stages of the design, development and approvals process, including continuous benefit-risk assessment, increased support for novel development approaches and enhanced patient engagement. However, although the goal of the ILAP is to reduce the time to market and enable earlier patient access, access does not accelerate conduct of clinical trials or mean that the regulatory requirements are less stringent, nor does it ensure that a marketing authorization application will be approved or that any approval will be granted within a particular timeframe or at all.

Healthcare Laws and Regulations

Coverage and Reimbursement

Our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates will depend in part on the extent to which coverage and adequate reimbursement for these products and related treatments will be available from government health administration authorities, private health insurers and other organizations. Even if coverage is provided, the approved reimbursement amount may not be high enough to allow us to establish or maintain pricing sufficient to realize a sufficient return on our investment. Government authorities and third-party payors, such as private health insurers and health maintenance organizations, decide which medications they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels.

There is also significant uncertainty related to the insurance coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products and coverage may be more limited than the purposes for which the medicine is approved by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. In the United States, the principal decisions about reimbursement for new medicines are typically made by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”), an agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. CMS decides whether and to what extent a new medicine will be covered and reimbursed under Medicare and private payors tend to follow CMS to a substantial degree. Factors payors consider in determining reimbursement are based on whether the product is a covered benefit under its health plan; safe, effective and medically necessary; appropriate for the specific patient; cost-effective; and neither experimental nor investigational. Increasingly, third-party payors are requiring that drug companies provide them with predetermined discounts from list prices and are challenging the prices charged for medical products.

Outside of the United States, the pricing of pharmaceutical products is subject to governmental control in many countries. For example, in the European Union, pricing and reimbursement schemes vary widely from country to country. Some countries provide that products may be marketed only after a reimbursement price has been agreed. Some countries may require the completion of additional studies that compare the cost-effectiveness of a particular therapy to currently available therapies or so-called health technology assessments, in order to obtain reimbursement or pricing approval. Other countries may allow companies to fix their own prices for products, but monitor and control product volumes and issue guidance to physicians to limit prescriptions. We cannot be sure that reimbursement will be available for any of our product candidates that we commercialize and, if reimbursement is available, the level of reimbursement.

Other Healthcare Laws

Sales of our product candidate, if approved, or any other future product candidate will be subject to healthcare regulation and enforcement by the federal government and the states and foreign governments in which we might conduct our business. The healthcare laws and regulations that may affect our ability to operate include the following:

Many states have similar laws and regulations, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws that may be broader in scope and may apply regardless of payor, in addition to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid and other state programs. Additionally, we may be subject to state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the federal government’s and/or pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines, state laws that require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures. Certain states and local jurisdictions also require the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives. Further, certain states require the posting of information relating to clinical studies and their outcomes. A growing number of states require the reporting of certain drug pricing information, including information pertaining to and justifying price increases and the price set for newly launched drugs, or to prohibit prescription drug price gouging. We may also be subject to state and foreign laws governing the privacy and security of health information, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA. In the United States, there are numerous federal and state privacy and data security laws and regulations governing the collection, use, disclosure and protection of personal information, including federal and state health information privacy laws, federal and state security breach notification laws, and federal and state consumer protection laws. Each of these laws is subject to varying interpretations and new laws continue to be proposed. At the state level, numerous states have or are in the process of enacting or considering comprehensive

state-level data privacy and security laws, rules and regulations while other states have focused on more narrow aspects of privacy. In the state of Washington, for example, the My Health My Data Act will require regulated entities to obtain consent to collect health information, grant consumers certain rights, including to request deletion of their information, and provide for robust enforcement mechanisms, including enforcement by the Washington state attorney-general and a private right of action for consumer claims. Other states have also enacted, proposed, or are considering proposing, data privacy laws, which could further complicate compliance efforts, increase our potential liability and adversely affect our business. Additionally, to the extent that our product is sold in a foreign country, we may be subject to similar foreign laws.

Healthcare Reform

The United States and many foreign jurisdictions have enacted or proposed legislative and regulatory changes affecting the healthcare system. The United States government, state legislatures and foreign governments also have shown significant interest in implementing cost-containment programs to limit the growth of government-paid healthcare costs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products for branded prescription drugs. Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the prices charged for medical products and services, examining the medical necessity and reviewing the cost effectiveness of pharmaceutical or biological products, medical devices, and medical services, in addition to questioning safety and efficacy. CMS also has authority to revise reimbursement rates and to implement coverage restrictions for some drugs. Cost reduction initiatives and changes in coverage implemented through legislation or regulation could decrease utilization of and reimbursement for any approved products. While Medicare regulations apply only to drug benefits for Medicare beneficiaries, private payors often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement rates. Therefore, although private payors have their own methods and approval process apart from Medicare determinations, any reduction in reimbursement that results from federal legislation or regulation may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors.

The Affordable Care Act substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers, included provisions that affected the pharmaceutical industry. Among other things, the Affordable Care Act expanded manufacturers’ rebate liability under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, expanded the 340B program, and increased the amount of Medicaid drug rebates manufacturers are required to pay to states. Since that time, several healthcare reform proposals recently culminated in the enactment of the Inflation Reduction Act (“IRA”) in August 2022, which, among other things, allows HHS to directly negotiate the selling price of a statutorily specified number of drugs and biologics each year that CMS reimburses under Medicare Part B and Part D. Only high-expenditure single-source biologics that have been approved for at least 11 years (7 years for drugs) can be selected by CMS for negotiation, with the negotiated price taking effect two years after the selection year. Negotiations for Medicare Part D products take place in 2024 with the negotiated price taking effect in 2026, and negotiations for Medicare Part B products will begin in 2026 with the negotiated price taking effect in 2028. In August 2023, HHS announced the ten Medicare Part D drugs and biologics that it selected for negotiations. HHS will announce the negotiated maximum fair prices by September 1, 2024, and this price cap, which cannot exceed a statutory ceiling price, will go into effect on January 1, 2026. A drug or biological product that has an orphan drug designation for only one rare disease or condition will be excluded from the IRA’s price negotiation requirements, but will lose that exclusion if it receives designations for more than one rare disease or condition, or if is approved for an indication that is not within that single designated rare disease or condition, unless such additional designation or such disqualifying approvals are withdrawn by the time CMS evaluates the drug for selection for negotiation. The IRA also imposes rebates on Medicare Part B and Part D drugs whose prices have increased at a rate greater than the rate of inflation. The IRA also extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in ACA marketplaces through plan year 2025. The IRA permits the Secretary of HHS to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. Manufacturers that fail to comply with the IRA may be subject to various penalties, including significant civil monetary penalties. These provisions have been and may continue to be subject to legal challenges. For example, the provisions related to the negotiation of selling prices of high-expenditure single-source drugs and biologics have been challenged in multiple lawsuits brought by pharmaceutical manufacturers. Thus, while it is unclear how the IRA will be implemented, it will likely have a significant impact on the biopharmaceutical industry and the pricing of prescription drug products.

At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. For example, the FDA released a final rule in

September 2020 providing guidance for states to build and submit plans for importing drugs from Canada, and FDA authorized the first such plan in Florida in January 2024. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs.

We expect that additional federal, state and foreign healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in limited coverage and reimbursement and reduced demand for our products, once approved, or additional pricing pressures.

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

You should consider carefully the following risks and uncertainties when reading this Annual Report on Form 10-K, as well as the other information contained herein, including our audited consolidated financial statements and the related notes and the section titled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation.” If any of the following risks occur, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. Although we believe that we have identified and discussed below the key risk factors affecting our business, there may be additional risks and uncertainties that are not presently known or that are not currently believed to be significant that may adversely affect our performance or financial condition. In that event, the trading price of our common stock could decline.

Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Need for Capital

We have incurred significant losses since our inception and anticipate that we will incur continued losses for the foreseeable future.

Since our inception we have devoted substantially all of our resources to the development of nomlabofusp. We have incurred significant losses in each year of operation since our inception in 2016. For the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, we had net losses of $36.9 million and $35.4 million, respectively, and, as of December 31, 2023, we had an accumulated deficit of $188.6 million and we expect to continue to incur significant expenses and net operating losses ("NOLs") for the foreseeable future.

We have devoted substantially all of our financial resources and efforts to research and development, including non-clinical studies, our clinical development program, the development of manufacturing processes as well as the manufacture of initial lots of clinical trial material. We expect to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future to further develop and commercialize our lead drug candidate, nomlabofusp.

We expect that our expenses will increase substantially if and as we:

We currently have no sales, marketing or medical affairs infrastructure and have no experience in the sales, marketing, or distribution of pharmaceutical products. Assuming nomlabofusp ultimately is approved for marketing in the US and elsewhere, we will need to establish commercial capabilities as well as customer service and support, logistics, and other related functions, or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services.

Net losses and negative cash flows have had, and will continue to have, an adverse effect on our liquidity and potentially the ability for us to raise capital due to our unfavorable operating results.

We have no commercial revenue and may never become profitable.

To date, we have not generated any commercial revenue. Our ability to generate revenue and become profitable depends upon our ability to obtain regulatory approval for, and to successfully commercialize, nomlabofusp or other product candidates that we may develop, in-license or acquire in the future.

This will require success in a range of challenging activities, including completing numerous clinical trials of nomlabofusp or any future product candidates, obtaining marketing approval for nomlabofusp and any future product candidates, manufacturing, marketing and selling those products for which we, or any future collaborators

or partners, may obtain marketing approval, satisfying any post-marketing requirements and obtaining reimbursement for our products from private insurance and/or government payors. Even if we are able to successfully achieve the above, we do not know what the reimbursement status of nomlabofusp or any other future product candidates will be or when any of these products will generate revenue for us, if at all. We have not generated, and do not expect to generate, any product revenue for the foreseeable future, and expect to continue to incur significant operating losses for the foreseeable future due to the cost of research and development, non-clinical studies and clinical trials and the regulatory approval process for nomlabofusp and any future product candidates.

Our ability to generate revenue from nomlabofusp or any future product candidates also depends on a number of additional factors, including our ability to:

Because of the uncertainties and risks associated with these activities, we are unable to accurately predict the timing and amount of increased expenses, and if or when we might achieve or maintain profitability. We and any future collaborators may never succeed in these activities and, even if we do, or any future collaborators do, we may never generate revenues that are large enough for us to achieve profitability. Even if we are able to complete the processes described above, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercializing nomlabofusp or any of our future product candidates. Even if we achieve profitability in the future, we may not be able to sustain profitability in subsequent periods. Our failure to become and remain profitable could decrease the value of our business and could impair our ability to raise capital, maintain our discovery and clinical development efforts, expand our business or continue our operations and may require us to raise additional capital that may dilute the ownership interest of shareholders. A decline in the value of our business could also cause shareholders to lose all or part of their investment.

We may need to raise additional funding to complete the development and commercialization of nomlabofusp. This funding may not be available on acceptable terms, or at all. Failure to obtain this necessary capital when needed would force us to delay, limit or terminate our product development efforts or other operations.

As of December 31, 2023, our existing cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities were $86.8 million, excluding restricted cash of $1.3 million. In February 2024, we completed an underwritten public offering of 19,736,842 shares of our common stock at an offering price of $8.74 per share with net proceeds, after deducting underwriting commissions and offering costs, of approximately $161.6 million. Together with our existing cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities, we have adequate resources to fund our operations into 2026.

We expect to continue to spend substantial and increasing amounts to conduct clinical trials of nomlabofusp and further research and development activities for nomlabofusp, and for any additional product candidates that we may develop, in-license or acquire in the future. In addition, raising funds in the current economic environment may present substantial challenges, and our expenses will increase as we expand, through development, in-license or acquisition, our pipeline of product candidates. If we obtain marketing approval for any of our product candidates, we will likely incur significant commercialization expenses related to product sales, marketing, manufacturing and distribution to the extent that such sales, marketing, manufacturing and distribution are not the responsibility of a future collaborator. Accordingly, we will need to obtain additional funding in connection with our continuing operations. Our current cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities may not be sufficient to fund all of the

efforts that we plan to undertake or to fund the completion of the development and commercialization of nomlabofusp. Accordingly, we may be required to obtain further funding through public or private equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations and licensing arrangements or other sources. The incurrence of indebtedness would result in increased fixed payment obligations and we may be required to agree to certain restrictive covenants, such as limitations on our ability to incur additional debt, limitations on our ability to acquire, sell or license intellectual property rights and other operating restrictions that could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business. Any additional fundraising efforts may divert our management from their day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates.

If additional capital is needed to complete the development and commercialization of nomlabofusp, there can be no assurance that we will be able to raise sufficient additional capital on acceptable terms or at all. If such additional financing is not available on satisfactory terms, or is not available in sufficient amounts, or we do not have sufficient authorized shares, we may be required to delay, limit, or eliminate the development of business opportunities and our ability to achieve our business objectives, our competitiveness, and our business, financial condition, and results of operations will be materially adversely affected. We could also be required to seek funds through arrangements with collaborative partners or otherwise at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable and we may be required to relinquish rights to some of our technologies or product candidates or otherwise agree to terms unfavorable to us, any of which may have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results, financial condition and prospects. In addition, geopolitical tension including, for example, the broader impact of the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine and the current conflict in Israel and Gaza (including any escalation or expansion), and the impact of a future pandemic, epidemic or outbreak of an infectious disease, such as COVID-19, or recent liquidity constraints, failures and instability in U.S. and international financial banking systems on the global financial markets may reduce our ability to access capital, which could negatively affect our liquidity.

If additional capital is needed to complete the development and commercialization of nomlabofusp, and if we are unable to obtain funding when needed and/or on acceptable terms, we may be required to significantly curtail, delay or discontinue one or more of our research and development programs, the manufacture of clinical and commercial supplies, product portfolio expansion or pre commercialization efforts, which could adversely affect our business prospects, or we may be unable to continue operations.

Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our existing stockholders, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish rights to our technologies, nomlabofusp or other product candidates that we may develop, in-license or acquire in the future.

We may seek additional capital through a combination of private or public equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations and licensing arrangements or other sources. To the extent we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, existing ownership interests will be diluted and the terms of such financings may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect the rights of existing stockholders. Debt or equity financings may be coupled with an additional equity component, such as warrants to purchase shares, which could also result in dilution of our existing stockholder’s ownership.

If we raise additional funds through strategic partnerships and alliances and licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights, including future revenue streams, to nomlabofusp or other product candidates that we may develop, in-license or acquire in the future, or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us.

Our ability to use our NOLs and certain other tax attributes may be limited.

As of December 31, 2023 we had NOL carryforwards that expire for U.S. federal income tax purposes of $179.0 million, a portion of which begin to expire in 2026. Our NOLs could expire unused and be unavailable to offset future income tax liabilities because of their limited duration or because of restrictions under U.S. tax law. NOLs generated in taxable years beginning before January 1, 2018 are permitted to be carried forward for 20 taxable years under applicable U.S. federal income tax law. Under current U.S. federal income tax law, NOLs arising in tax years beginning after December 31, 2020 may not be carried back. Moreover, NOLs generated in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017 may be carried forward indefinitely. As of December 31, 2023, the Company had federal net operating loss carryforwards that were generated after December 31, 2017 of $140.3 million that do not expire, however these carryforwards are limited to 80% of the taxable income in any one tax period.

In general, under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code (the "Code") if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” generally defined as a greater than 50% change (by value) in its equity ownership over a

three-year period, the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change NOLs and other pre-change tax attributes (such as capitalized research and development costs and research tax credits) to offset its post-change income may be limited. We believe that as a result of our merger with Zafgen, our ability to utilize NOLs acquired in the transaction and our other NOLs is expected to be severely limited by Section 382 of the Code. Additionally, our July 2021, September 2022 and February 2024 equity transactions could also limit our ability to utilize NOLs in the future. We may also experience ownership changes in the future as a result of subsequent shifts in our stock ownership. As a result, if we earn net taxable income, our ability to use our pre-change NOLs to offset U.S. federal taxable income may be subject to limitations, which could potentially result in increased future tax liability to us. In addition, at the state level, there may be periods during which the use of NOLs is suspended or otherwise limited, which could accelerate or permanently increase state taxes owed and would adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Changes in tax laws and regulations may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

New income, sales, use or other tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be enacted at any time, which could affect the tax treatment of any of our future domestic and foreign earnings. Any new taxes could adversely affect our domestic and international business operations, and our business and financial performance. Further, existing tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be interpreted, changed, modified or applied adversely to us. For example, under Section 174 of the code, in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2021, expenses that are incurred for research and development in the U.S. are capitalized and amortized, which may have an adverse effect on our cash flow. In addition, it is unclear how these U.S. federal income tax changes will affect state and local taxation. Generally, future changes in applicable U.S. tax laws and regulations, or their interpretation and application could have an adverse effect on our business, financial conditions and results of operations.

Risks Related to Our Product Development and Regulatory Approvals

The FDA has placed a partial clinical hold on nomlabofusp and there is uncertainty as to when, or if, the FDA will lift the partial clinical hold on our nomlabofusp program, or if it will ever allow further clinical development of nomlabofusp beyond our currently ongoing OLE study at the 25 mg dose level.

To support extended dosing of patients with nomlabofusp, we conducted a 26-week NHP toxicology study. In May 2021, we notified the FDA of certain mortalities which occurred at the two highest dose levels in the then ongoing study. On May 25, 2021, the FDA placed a clinical hold on the nomlabofusp clinical program. In the clinical hold letter, the FDA stated that it needed to review a full study report from the then-ongoing NHP study and that we could not initiate additional interventional clinical trials until we submitted such report and received notification from the FDA that additional clinical trials could commence. At the time of the FDA clinical hold, we had no interventional clinical trials with patients enrolling or enrolled.

In July 2021, we completed dosing in the 26-week NHP toxicology study. The study included four dose groups in addition to vehicle. Data from the study were collected throughout the second half of 2021 and included in the complete response to the clinical hold submitted to the FDA in January 2022.

In February 2022, in response to the complete response to clinical hold, we submitted to the FDA, the FDA stated that it was maintaining the clinical hold and that additional data were needed to resolve the clinical hold. We subsequently submitted a request to the FDA for a Type C meeting, which was granted and held in July 2022. We submitted a complete response to clinical hold incorporating additional information requested by the FDA at the meeting as well as information on the proposed study in August 2022.

In September 2022, following the Type C meeting and the submission of the complete response to clinical hold, the FDA allowed the 25 mg cohort of a Phase 2, four-week, placebo-controlled, dose exploration trial of nomlabofusp in FA patients discussed above to proceed. In connection with this decision, the FDA lifted its full clinical hold on the nomlabofusp clinical development program and imposed a partial clinical hold.

In June 2023, we met with the FDA. Following that meeting, we submitted a complete response to the FDA’s partial clinical hold that included unblinded safety, PK and frataxin data from the Phase 2 trial’s completed 25 mg cohort.

In July 2023, following the FDA’s review of our complete response to the partial clinical hold, the FDA cleared initiation of a second cohort (50 mg) in our four-week, placebo-controlled, Phase 2 dose exploration trial and the initiation of our OLE trial with daily dosing of 25 mg.

In January 2024, we initiated the OLE trial evaluating daily subcutaneous injections of 25 mg of nomlabofusp self-administered or administered by a caregiver, with the first patient dosed in March 2024. Dose escalation in the OLE trial will be considered based on safety, tolerability, PK, and tissue FXN levels from the Phase 2 trial’s 50 mg cohort as well as available data from the 25 mg dose of nomlabofusp in the OLE trial, and is contingent on FDA review as part of the partial clinical hold. Initial data from the OLE trial is expected in the fourth quarter of 2024.

In February 2024, we reported positive top-line data and successful completion of both the 25 mg cohort and the 50 mg cohort of our four-week, placebo-controlled Phase 2 dose exploration study of nomlabofusp in participants with FA. Nomlabofusp was generally well tolerated and demonstrated dose dependent increases in FXN levels in all evaluated tissues (skin and buccal cells) after daily dosing of 14 days followed by every other day dosing until day 28 in the 25 mg and 50 mg cohorts.

Our business may be adversely affected if the FDA partial clinical hold does not enable the development program to proceed as planned, if the FDA places a full clinical hold on the development of nomlabofusp, or, if additional non-clinical or clinical studies are required. This may cause significant delays or expense in developing nomlabofusp.

Our success is currently dependent upon the success of our lead product candidate, nomlabofusp. We cannot be certain that data from both cohorts of our Phase 2 dose exploration study augmented by data from the OLE trial will provide the FDA with adequate data to remove the partial clinical hold on nomlabofusp, allow the nomlabofusp development program to proceed as planned in part or in full, or that we will ultimately be successful with our clinical development or that we will be ever able to obtain regulatory approval for nomlabofusp.

We currently have no drug products for sale and our business is currently wholly dependent on our successful clinical development, regulatory approval and commercialization of nomlabofusp, our lead product candidate and our only product candidate in clinical development, for which we have completed two Phase 1 studies and a four-week, placebo-controlled Phase 2 dose exploration study in patients with FA. In January 2024, as permitted by the FDA, we initiated the OLE trial evaluating daily subcutaneous injections of 25 mg of nomlabofusp self-administered or administered by a caregiver, with the first patient dosed in March 2024. Participants who completed treatment in the Phase 2 dose exploration trial, or who previously completed a prior clinical trial of nomlabofusp are potentially eligible for the OLE. Dose escalation in the OLE trial will be considered based on safety, PK, and tissue FXN levels from the 25 mg dose of nomlabofusp in the OLE trial, as well as other data from the Phase 2 trial’s 50 mg cohort, and is contingent on FDA review as part of the partial clinical hold. We cannot provide any assurance that the data from our Phase 1 and Phase 2 trials augmented by data from the OLE trial will prove the FDA with adequate data to remove the partial clinical hold, allow us to continue our development of nomlabofusp, or that we will ultimately be successful in our clinical development.

In addition to the regulatory and manufacturing hurdles faced by our product candidate, the administration of a protein such as nomlabofusp, may cause an immune response, resulting in the creation of antibodies directed against the protein. These anti-drug antibodies can have no effect or can neutralize the effectiveness of the protein or require that higher doses be used to obtain a therapeutic effect. Neutralizing antibodies may be detected at a later date or upon longer exposure periods and there can be no assurance that neutralizing antibodies will not be detected in the future.

If our efforts to develop and commercialize nomlabofusp for the treatment of FA are unsuccessful, or we experience significant delays in doing so, our business could also be substantially harmed. The success of nomlabofusp will depend on several factors, including the following:

Many of these factors are outside of our control, including the clinical development and regulatory approval processes, results of non-clinical and toxicology studies and clinical trials, potential threats to our intellectual property rights and the manufacturing, marketing and sales efforts, respectively. The process of obtaining regulatory approval is expensive and time consuming. The FDA and foreign regulatory authorities may never approve nomlabofusp for sale and marketing, and even if nomlabofusp is ultimately approved, regulatory approval may be delayed or limited in the United States or in other jurisdictions. Even if we are authorized to sell and market nomlabofusp in one or more markets, there is no assurance that we will be able to successfully market nomlabofusp or that nomlabofusp will achieve market acceptance sufficient to generate profits. If we are unable to successfully develop and commercialize nomlabofusp due to failure to obtain regulatory approval for nomlabofusp, to successfully market nomlabofusp, to generate profits from the sale of nomlabofusp, or due to other risk factors outlined in this report, it would have material adverse effects on our business, financial condition, and results of operations as nomlabofusp is currently our sole product candidate.

Clinical development is a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome, and the results of non-clinical studies, toxicology studies or clinical trials may not be predictive of future non-clinical studies, toxicology studies or clinical trial results.

Clinical development is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. We cannot guarantee that any non-clinical studies, toxicology studies or clinical trials will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all, and failure can occur at any time during the non-clinical study, toxicology study or clinical trial process. Despite promising non-clinical, toxicology or clinical results, any product candidate can unexpectedly fail at any stage of non-clinical, toxicology or clinical development. The historical failure rate for product candidates in our industry is high, especially for products in early stages of development.

The results from non-clinical studies, toxicology studies or clinical trials of a product candidate may not predict the results of later non-clinical or clinical trials of the product candidate, or in clinical trials with different patient populations such as children and adolescents and interim results of a clinical trial are not necessarily

indicative of final results. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy characteristics despite having progressed through non-clinical studies and initial clinical trials. It is not uncommon to observe results in clinical trials that are unexpected based on non-clinical studies and early clinical trials, and many product candidates fail in clinical trials despite very promising early results. Favorable safety and efficacy outcomes in adult clinical trials may not be seen in pediatric clinical trials.

Moreover, current and future non-clinical and clinical data may be susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in clinical development even after achieving promising results in earlier studies. Furthermore, we cannot provide assurance that we will be able to successfully progress any future non-clinical programs from candidate identification to Phase 1 clinical development. As is typical in candidate development, we have a program of toxicology studies in animals for nomlabofusp and cannot provide assurance that the findings from such studies or any ongoing or future clinical trials will not adversely affect the clinical development of nomlabofusp. For the foregoing reasons, we cannot be certain that our non-clinical studies and clinical trials will be successful. If non-clinical studies or clinical trials for nomlabofusp or any future product candidates or indications fail to demonstrate safety or efficacy to the satisfaction of the FDA or the equivalent regulatory authorities in other countries, the FDA or equivalent regulatory authority will not approve our product candidates in those and other indications, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition results of operations and prospects.

We do not know whether any ongoing or future clinical trials for nomlabofusp will be completed on schedule, if at all, as the commencement and completion of clinical trials can be delayed, prevented or terminated for a number of reasons, including as a result of safety concerns, or ambiguous or negative interim results. In addition, a clinical trial may be suspended or terminated by us, the FDA, other regulatory authorities, IRBs or ethics committees, an independent data monitoring committee, or safety review committee, overseeing the clinical trial at issue or other regulatory authorities due to a number of factors, including, among others:

Failures or delays in the completion of our clinical trials could result in increased costs and could delay, prevent or limit our ability to generate revenue and continue our business.

For our lead product candidate nomlabofusp, we have completed two Phase 1 clinical trials in patients with FA and our four-week, placebo-controlled Phase 2 dose exploration study of nomlabofusp in FA patients. The FDA has agreed that we may commence our OLE study in patients who previously participated in one of our previous nomlabofusp clinical trials at the 25 mg level. We cannot be certain that data from both cohorts of our Phase 2 dose exploration study augmented by data from the OLE study will provide the FDA with adequate data to remove the current partial clinical hold on nomlabofusp.

Clinical trials may also be delayed or terminated as a result of safety issues in non-clinical or clinical trials, ambiguous or negative interim results or events outside of our control.

If future clinical trials of nomlabofusp fail or further delays occur in the United States and or other countries, we may not be able to develop and commercialize nomlabofusp and could fail to realize the potential advantages of doing so, and it could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, disruptions caused by future pandemic, epidemic or outbreak of an infectious disease, such as the COVID-19 pandemic may increase the likelihood that we encounter such difficulties or delays in initiating, enrolling, conducting or completing our planned and ongoing clinical trials. Further, FA is a rare disease, there are a limited number of patients in close proximity to clinical trial sites and clinical trial patients may need to travel from other countries to the clinical trial sites in order to participate. In addition, given the limited number of FA patients, the recent approval of a competing therapy for the treatment of FA may make patients less likely to enroll in our clinical trials or less likely to be eligible for our clinical trials. Any inability to successfully initiate or complete clinical trials could result in additional costs to us or impair our ability to generate revenue from product sales. In addition, if we make manufacturing or formulation changes to our product candidates, we may be required to or we may elect to conduct additional studies to bridge our modified product candidates to earlier versions. Clinical trial delays could also shorten any periods during which our products have patent protection and may allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do, which could impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and may seriously harm our business.

We may not be successful in our efforts to identify, discover or acquire additional product candidates.

We currently only have one product candidate nomlabofusp in clinical development, although we have other product candidates in pre-clinical development. Therefore, the success of our business largely depends upon our ability to identify, develop, in-license or acquire and commercialize products targeting rare diseases. We may focus our efforts and resources on potential programs or product candidates that ultimately prove to be unsuccessful. In addition, our research methodology may be unsuccessful in identifying potential product candidates or our potential product candidates may be shown to have harmful side effects or may have other characteristics that may make the products unmarketable or unlikely to receive marketing approval.

Research programs to identify new product candidates require substantial technical, financial and human resources. We may focus our efforts and resources on potential programs or product candidates that ultimately prove to be unsuccessful. If any of these events occur, we may be forced to abandon our development efforts for a program or programs, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We have no marketed proprietary products and have not yet advanced a product candidate beyond Phase 2 clinical trials, which makes it difficult to assess our ability to develop nomlabofusp or any future product candidates and commercialize any resulting products independently.

We have little experience in later stage clinical development, and related regulatory requirements or the commercialization of products. As a result, we have not yet demonstrated our ability to independently and repeatedly conduct clinical development after Phase 1, successfully conduct an international multi-center clinical trial, conduct a pivotal clinical trial, obtain regulatory approval, manufacture drug product on a commercial scale or

arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, and commercialize therapeutic products. We will need to develop such abilities if we are to execute on our business strategy to develop and independently commercialize product candidates for orphan and niche indications. To execute on our business plan for the development of independent programs, we will need to successfully:

If we are unsuccessful in accomplishing these objectives, we will not be able to develop and commercialize any product candidates independently and could fail to realize the potential advantages of doing so, and it would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We cannot be certain that we will be able to successfully complete clinical trials for nomlabofusp or any other product candidates.

We have advanced only one product candidate into clinical development, nomlabofusp. Our business currently depends primarily on nomlabofusp’s successful clinical development, regulatory approval and commercialization. We submitted our IND and it was accepted, permitting the conduct of clinical trials. We completed two Phase 1 and our four-week, placebo-controlled Phase 2 dose exploration study. As a result of certain mortalities in a non-clinical study of NHPs, the FDA issued a clinical hold in May 2021.

In September 2022, following a Type C meeting and the submission of our complete response to the partial clinical hold, the FDA allowed the 25 mg cohort of a Phase 2, four-week, placebo-controlled, dose exploration trial of nomlabofusp in FA patients to proceed. In connection with this decision, the FDA lifted its full clinical hold on the nomlabofusp clinical development program and imposed a partial hold.

In June 2023, we met with the FDA. Following that meeting, we submitted a complete response to the FDA’s partial clinical hold that included unblinded safety, PK and frataxin data from the Phase 2 trial’s completed 25 mg cohort.

In July 2023, following the FDA’s review of our complete response to the partial clinical hold, the FDA cleared initiation of a second cohort at 50 mg of our four-week, placebo-controlled, Phase 2 dose exploration trial and to initiate our OLE trial with daily dosing of 25 mg.

In February 2024, we reported positive top-line data and successful completion of our four-week, placebo-controlled Phase 2 dose exploration study of nomlabofusp in participants with FA. Nomlabofusp was generally well tolerated and demonstrated dose dependent increases in FXN levels in all evaluated tissues (skin and buccal cells) after daily dosing of 14 days followed by every other day dosing until day 28 in the 25 mg and 50 mg cohorts. Participants in the 25 mg (n=13) and 50 mg (n=15) cohorts were randomized 2:1 to receive subcutaneous injections of nomlabofusp or placebo. The initiation of additional U.S. clinical trials evaluating nomlabofusp are contingent on FDA review of data under the partial clinical hold.

The FDA has agreed that we may commence our OLE study in patients who previously participated in one of our previous nomlabofusp clinical trials at the 25 mg level dosed daily. We cannot be certain that data from both cohorts of our Phase 2 dose exploration study augmented by data from the OLE study will provide the FDA with adequate data to remove the current partial clinical hold on nomlabofusp, allow the nomlabofusp development program to proceed as planned in part or in full, or that we will ultimately be successful with our clinical development or that we will be ever able to obtain regulatory approval for.

In clinical development of any product candidate, the outcome of toxicology studies and early clinical trials may not be positive and may not be predictive of the success of later non-clinical studies or clinical trials. Adverse toxicology or safety results could lead to clinical holds or other developmental delays. Interim results of clinical

trials do not necessarily predict success in those or future clinical trials. Success in adult clinical trials may not predict the outcome of pediatric clinical trials.

Published clinical data or case reports from third parties or early clinical trial data of nomlabofusp or any future product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. Interpretation of results from early, usually smaller, studies that suggest a clinically meaningful response in some patients, requires caution. Results from later stages of clinical trials enrolling more patients, or different patient populations, such as pediatric patients, may fail to show the desired safety or efficacy results or otherwise fail to be consistent with the results of earlier trials of the same product candidate. Later clinical trial results may not replicate earlier clinical trials for a variety of reasons, including differences in trial design, different trial endpoints (or lack of trial endpoints in exploratory studies), different patient population, number of patients, patient selection criteria, trial duration, drug dosage and formulation and lack of statistical power. These uncertainties are enhanced where the diseases under study lack established clinical endpoints, validated measures of efficacy, as is often the case with orphan diseases for which no drugs have been developed previously and where the product candidates target novel mechanisms. For example, to our knowledge, nomlabofusp is the only protein replacement therapy being developed for the treatment of FA and therefore non-clinical studies may not be adequate to predict efficacy in a clinical trial due to our novel protein replacement therapy platform.

In some instances, there can be significant variability in safety or efficacy results between different clinical trials of the same product candidate due to numerous factors, including changes in trial procedures set forth in protocols, differences in the size and type of the patient populations, such as pediatric patients, variability of the disease being studied, changes in and adherence to the dosing regimen and other clinical trial protocols and the rate of dropout among clinical trial participants. If we fail to ultimately receive positive results in clinical trials of nomlabofusp, the development timeline and regulatory approval and commercialization prospects for nomlabofusp, and, correspondingly, our business, financial prospects and results of operation would be negatively impacted.

Further, nomlabofusp or any future product candidates may not be approved even if they achieve their primary endpoint in clinical trials. The FDA, EMA or foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with our trial design and our interpretation of data from non-clinical studies and clinical trials. In addition, FDA, EMA or foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with the extent of population exposure to assess clinical safety. Any of these regulatory authorities may change its requirements for the approval of a product candidate even after reviewing and providing comments or advice on a protocol for a pivotal clinical trial that, if successful, would potentially form the basis for an application for approval by the FDA, EMA or another regulatory authority. Furthermore, any of these regulatory authorities may also approve nomlabofusp or any future product candidates for a narrower indication than we may request or may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly post-marketing clinical trials.

We may experience difficulties identifying and enrolling patients in our clinical trials given the limited number of patients who have the disease for which nomlabofusp is being studied or for any other product candidate we may study in the future. Difficulty in enrolling patients could delay or prevent clinical trials of nomlabofusp or any future product candidate. There are also competing FA therapeutics, other competing studies and potentially other FA therapeutics that could be approved that may also limit the availability of prospective participants in nomlabofusp clinical trials.

Identifying and qualifying patients to participate in clinical trials of nomlabofusp is critical to our success. The timing of our clinical trials depends in part on the speed at which we can recruit patients to participate in testing nomlabofusp, and we may experience delays in our clinical trials if we encounter difficulties in enrollment, such as difficulties with enrollment in pediatric clinical trials.

The conditions for which we are planning to evaluate nomlabofusp and any product candidates we may evaluate in the future, are rare genetic diseases. Accordingly, there are limited patient pools from which to draw for clinical trials. Arranging for investigative sites and recruiting patients for clinical trials in this disease may be very difficult. The recent FDA approval of a product for the treatment of FA may impact our ability to enroll patients in our clinical trials as patients using other FA treatments may be excluded from participation in our nomlabofusp studies or may be less likely to participate in our nomlabofusp clinical trials due to the availability of another FA therapy. If other companies are studying their investigational products in Friedreich’s ataxia and/or if other companies have their products approved for the treatment of FA, it may be more difficult to enroll eligible patients into our clinical trials. Competing priorities at sites and participation of subjects in other studies may limit our ability to execute clinical trials in a timely fashion, if at all.

In addition to the rarity of FA and other diseases that we are studying, the eligibility criteria of our clinical trials will further limit the pool of available study participants as it will require patients to have specific characteristics that we can measure to assure their disease is either severe enough or not too advanced to include them in a clinical trial. The process of finding and diagnosing patients may prove costly, especially since the diseases we are studying are rare. We also may not be able to identify, recruit, and enroll a sufficient number of appropriate patients to complete our clinical trials because of demographic criteria for prospective patients, the perceived risks and benefits of the product candidate under study, the proximity and availability of clinical trial sites for prospective patients, and the patient referral practices of physicians. The availability and efficacy of approved and competing therapies and clinical trials can also adversely impact enrollment. Furthermore, our inability to enroll a sufficient number of patients for our clinical trials, including pediatric clinical trials, could result in significant delays or may require us to abandon one or more clinical trials altogether. Enrollment delays in our clinical trials may result in increased development costs for nomlabofusp or any future product candidates, and jeopardize our ability to achieve our clinical development timeline and goals, including the dates by which we will commence, complete and receive results from clinical trials. If patients are unwilling to participate in our trials for any reason, the timeline for recruiting patients, conducting trials, and obtaining regulatory approval of potential products may be delayed. Enrollment delays in our clinical trials may also jeopardize our ability to commence sales of and generate revenues from nomlabofusp, which could cause the value of our company to decline and limit our ability to obtain additional financing, if needed. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition, and prospects significantly.

FA has no FDA-approved therapies that address frataxin deficiency, which is the underlying cause of the disease, and clinical endpoints required to obtain approval are not well defined.

There are currently no FDA-approved products to treat FA that are designed to increase frataxin levels. We have concentrated our research and development efforts on developing a novel, FA therapy designed to address frataxin deficiency, which is the underlying cause of the disease, and our future success depends on the success of this therapeutic approach. The clinical trial requirements of the FDA and other comparable regulatory agencies and the criteria these regulators use to determine the safety and efficacy of any product candidate vary substantially according to the type, complexity, novelty and intended use and market of the potential product.

Recently, we had discussions with the FDA regarding the use of tissue FXN levels as a novel surrogate endpoint. The FDA has acknowledged that frataxin deficiency appears to be critical to the pathogenic mechanism of FA, and that there continues to be an unmet need for treatments for FA patients that address the underlying disease pathophysiology. We intend to pursue an accelerated approval using FXN levels, supportive PD and clinical information, and safety data from the OLE study, along with additional non-clinical pharmacology information needed to support the novel surrogate endpoint approach. We are beginning to plan for a confirmatory study and are targeting a BLA submission in the second half of 2025. The FDA or other regulatory authorities may not agree with this approach.

Regulatory authorities in the United States, the United Kingdom and the European Union have not issued definitive guidance as to how to measure and achieve efficacy in treatments for FA. As a result, the design and conduct of clinical trials of nomlabofusp may take longer, be more costly or be less effective as part of the novelty of development in FA. The FDA may not accept that the supportive PD and clinical information, and safety data from the OLE study, along with additional non-clinical pharmacology data we ultimately submit in our BLA, adequately supports the use of FXN levels as a novel surrogate endpoint. Even if the FDA supports the use of FXN levels as a novel surrogate endpoint, the FDA may not agree with the adequacy of the design of clinical trials intended to assess this novel surrogate endpoint.

Even if applicable regulatory authorities do not object to our proposed endpoints in an earlier stage clinical trial, such regulatory authorities may require evaluation of additional or different clinical endpoints in later-stage clinical trials.

Nomlabofusp, including the effects of long-term daily patient dosing, may cause adverse events or undesirable side effects in clinical trials that could delay or prevent its regulatory approval, limit the commercial profile of approved labeling, or result in significant negative consequences following regulatory approval, if any.

Any adverse events or undesirable side effects caused by, or other unexpected properties of, nomlabofusp in non-clinical or clinical studies could cause us, any future collaborators, an IRB or ethics committee or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials of our product candidate and could result in a more restrictive

label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or other regulatory authorities. Should the FDA permit us to continue with the clinical development of nomlabofusp, it is possible that as we progress nomlabofusp through clinical trials and toxicology studies, or as the use of nomlabofusp becomes more widespread if it receives regulatory approval, illnesses, injuries, discomforts and other adverse events that were not observed in earlier trials, as well as conditions that did not occur or went undetected in previous trials, may be reported by patients. If such side effects become known later in development or after approval, such findings may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly. Further, if a serious safety issue is identified in connection with the use of nomlabofusp commercially or in third-party clinical trials elsewhere, such issues may adversely affect the development potential of nomlabofusp elsewhere or result in regulatory authorities restricting our ability to develop or commercialize nomlabofusp, if approved.

Further, if nomlabofusp were to receive marketing approval and we or others identify undesirable side effects caused by the product (or any other product) after the approval, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the affected product candidate and could substantially increase the costs of commercializing our product candidates and significantly impact our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and generate revenues, all of which would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, the patient populations under investigation with nomlabofusp have many co-morbidities that may cause severe illness or death unrelated to our product candidate, which may be attributed to nomlabofusp in a manner that negatively affects the safety profile of our product candidate.

Interim, “top-line,” and preliminary data from our clinical trials that we announce or publish from time to time may change as more patient data become available or as additional analyses are conducted, and as the data are subject to audit and verification procedures that could result in material changes in the final data.

From time to time, we may publish interim, preliminary or “top-line” data from 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. Preliminary or “top-line” data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result, interim and preliminary data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. Material adverse changes between interim, preliminary or “top-line” data and final data could significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Our approach to discover and develop fusion proteins for delivering proteins is novel and may never lead to marketable products.

We have concentrated our efforts and research and development activities on delivering proteins (FXN or other) to intracellular targets. Our future success depends on the successful development and manufacturing of such therapeutics and the effectiveness of our platform. The scientific discoveries that form the basis for our research are relatively new.

Nomlabofusp uses a novel and unproven approach and mechanism to treat FA and therefore its efficacy and safety are difficult to predict, and there is no guarantee that nomlabofusp will be approved by the FDA, the EMA, or any other regulatory authorities.

If nomlabofusp proves to be ineffective, unsafe or commercially unviable, it is possible that our platform and pipeline would have little, if any, value, which would substantially harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In addition, our approach may expose us to additional financial risks and make it more difficult to raise additional capital than other, more advanced proven technologies, which would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Protein replacement therapies are novel, complex and difficult to manufacture. We could experience manufacturing problems that result in delays in the development or commercialization of our protein replacement therapy platform or product candidates or otherwise harm our business.

The manufacture of fusion proteins, such as nomlabofusp and any fusion protein candidates, is technically complex and necessitates substantial expertise and capital investment. Production difficulties caused by unforeseen events may delay the availability of material for clinical trials and commercial products for nomlabofusp or any fusion protein product that may receive regulatory approval in the future. Additionally, because biologic products are complex, the manufacture of such products and product candidates is more difficult and costly. We may not be able to have such products reliably manufactured in accordance with the applicable regulatory requirements in sufficient quantities to support our development programs and, if ultimately approved, commercial supply.

There are a limited number of contract manufacturers who specialize in the manufacture of biologic products and those that do may still be developing appropriate processes, controls and facilities for large-scale production. While we believe that there will be sufficient sources of supply that can satisfy our clinical and commercial requirements, we cannot be certain that we will be able to identify and establish additional relationships with such sources, if necessary, in a timely manner or at all, and what the terms and costs of such new arrangements would be, or that such suppliers would be able to supply our potential commercial needs. Furthermore, in the event our primary manufacturer cannot meet our needs, any switch to an alternative manufacturer, if available, would result in a significant delay, would require FDA approval, and cause material additional costs.

As further described in these risk factors, the manufacturers of biologic products must comply with strictly enforced cGMP requirements, state and federal regulations, as well as foreign requirements when applicable. Any failure by us or our contract manufacturing organizations to adhere to or document compliance to such regulatory requirements could lead to a delay or interruption in the availability of our program materials for clinical trials or commercial use, among other consequences. If we or our manufacturers fail to comply with the FDA, EMA, or other regulatory authorities, it could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, clinical holds or termination of clinical trials, Form 483s, warning or untitled letters, regulatory communications warning the public about safety issues with a product, import or export refusals, license revocation, seizures, detentions, or recalls of product candidates or product, operating restrictions, criminal prosecutions or debarment, suits under the civil False Claims Act, corporate integrity agreements, or consent decrees any of which could significantly and adversely affect supplies of our product candidates and our business, financial conditions and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

Our current dependence upon others for the manufacture of our product candidates may also adversely affect our business, results of operations, financial condition, and our ability to commercialize any product candidates that receive regulatory approval on a timely and competitive basis.

Fast track designation by the FDA or any future expedited program designations may not lead to a faster development, regulatory review or approval process and it does not increase the likelihood that any of our product candidates will receive marketing approval.

We have received fast track therapy designation for nomlabofusp for the treatment of FA. We may, in the future, apply for other expedited program designations from the FDA (such as breakthrough therapy) for nomlabofusp or future product candidates. Designation for these programs is within the discretion of the FDA. Accordingly, even if we believe nomlabofusp or a future product candidate meets the criteria for designation, the

FDA may disagree. The receipt of a designation may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to products considered for approval without these expedited program designations and, in any event, does not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, even though nomlabofusp has obtained fast track designation, the FDA may later decide that it no longer meets the criteria for designation and revoke it. Approval of other therapies for the treatment Friedreich’s ataxia could negatively impact our continued fast track therapy designation for nomlabofusp for the treatment of FA. In addition, if we apply to the FDA for other designations for nomlabofusp or future product candidates, the FDA might not grant such designations. If we apply for any similar programs in foreign countries for nomlabofusp or future product candidates, those designations also might not be granted by the regulatory authorities of those countries. Any of the above could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We intend to pursue accelerated approval from FDA for nomlabofusp for the treatment of Friedreich’s ataxia, however this may not lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process and does not increase the likelihood that we will receive marketing approval. If we are unable to obtain approval under an accelerated pathway, we may be required to conduct additional clinical trials beyond those that we contemplate, which could increase the expense of obtaining, reduce the likelihood of obtaining, and/or delay the timing of obtaining, necessary marketing approvals.

We intend to pursue an accelerated approval from FDA for nomlabofusp for the treatment of FA using FXN levels, supportive pharmacodynamic and clinical information and safety data from the OLE study, along with additional non-clinical pharmacology information needed to support our surrogate biomarker approach. Under the FDA’s accelerated approval program, the FDA may approve a drug or biologic for a serious or life-threatening illness that provides meaningful therapeutic benefit to patients over existing treatments based upon a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality, that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit, taking into account the severity, rarity, or prevalence of the condition and the availability or lack of alternative treatments. Although we have initiated discussions with FDA concerning our surrogate biomarker approach, there can be no assurance that data we intend to generate will be successful in establishing that increases in FXN levels are reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. In addition, future nonclinical pharmacology and clinical studies may not provide adequate information or may fail to support the predictive value of increases in FXN and, therefore, its ability to serve as a surrogate endpoint. Even if these evidentiary requirements are met, we may not be able to accrue adequate exposures to assess clinical safety or expedite the scale up of manufacturing or meet other CMC requirements in a timeframe commensurate with the expedited assessment of clinical efficacy.

Approval of other therapies for the treatment of FA, including the approval of omaveloxolone for the treatment of FA, could negatively impact our ability to utilize the accelerated approval pathway, and/or get approval for nomlabofusp. For drugs or biologics granted accelerated approval, post-marketing confirmatory trials are required to describe the anticipated effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. These confirmatory trials must be completed with due diligence and, in some cases, the FDA may require that the trial be designed, initiated and/or fully enrolled prior to approval.

Moreover, the FDA may withdraw approval of any product candidate approved under the accelerated approval pathway if, for example:

In addition, the FDA may terminate the accelerated approval program or change the standards under which accelerated approvals are considered and granted in response to public pressure or other concerns regarding the accelerated approval program. Changes to or termination of the accelerated approval program could prevent or limit our ability to obtain accelerated approval of any of our clinical development programs. Recently, the accelerated

approval pathway has come under scrutiny within the FDA and by Congress. The FDA has put increased focus on ensuring that confirmatory studies are conducted with diligence and, ultimately, that such studies confirm the benefit. In addition, the Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act (“FDORA”), included provisions related to the accelerated approval pathway. Pursuant to FDORA, the FDA is authorized to require, as appropriate, that a post-approval study to be underway prior to approval or within a specified time period following approval. FDORA also requires the FDA to specify conditions of any required post-approval study and requires sponsors to submit progress reports for required post-approval studies and any conditions required by the FDA. FDORA also gives the FDA increased authority to withdraw approval of a drug or biologic granted accelerated approval on an expedited basis if the sponsor fails to verify the drug or biologic’s predicted clinical benefit. FDORA enables the FDA to initiate enforcement action for a sponsor's failure to conduct with due diligence a required post-approval study, including a failure to meet any required conditions specified by the FDA or to submit timely reports.

If we fail to maintain orphan drug designation or other regulatory exclusivity for nomlabofusp or obtain such exclusivity for any of our other product candidates in the future, our competitive position would be harmed.

We received orphan drug designation from the FDA for nomlabofusp for the treatment of FA in July 2017. In the United States, orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as tax advantages and user-fee waivers. In addition, if a product candidate that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including an NDA or BLA, to market the same drug for the same indication for seven years, except in limited circumstances, including if the FDA concludes that the later drug is clinically superior to the approved drug. A drug is clinically superior if it is safer, more effective, or makes a major contribution to patient care. In the case of a biological product, whether a drug is the same drug is based on the principal molecular structural features of the product. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug nor gives the drug any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process.

Additionally, we may lose orphan drug exclusivity if we are unable to assure sufficient quantity of the drug to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition. Moreover, orphan drug exclusivity may not effectively protect our product candidates from competition because different drugs can be approved for the same condition. Further, even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority can subsequently approve another drug for the same condition if such regulatory authority concludes that the later drug is clinically superior, if it is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care.

We have also received orphan drug designation for nomlabofusp in the European Union. In the European Union, the European Medicines Agency, or EMA’s Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products grants orphan drug designation to promote the development of products that are intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of life threatening or chronically debilitating conditions affecting not more than five in 10,000 persons in the European Union. Additionally, designation is granted for products intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life threatening, seriously debilitating or serious and chronic condition and when, without incentives, it is unlikely that sales of the drug in the European Union would be sufficient to justify the necessary investment in developing the drug. In the European Union, orphan drug designation also entitles a party to financial incentives such as reduction of fees or fee waivers and ten years of market exclusivity following drug approval. This period may be reduced to six years if the orphan drug designation criteria are no longer met, including where it is shown that the product is sufficiently profitable so that market exclusivity is no longer justified. Loss of orphan drug designation for nomlabofusp or the failure to obtain such designation in other countries or for any future product candidates could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operation.

If another product has received approval in the indications for which we have received orphan drug designation, we may still receive approval in that indication if we can demonstrate that our product candidate is clinically superior to the existing orphan product. This demonstration of clinical superiority may be done at the time of initial approval or in post-approval studies, depending on the type of marketing authorization granted. Having to comply with these additional requirements to obtain orphan drug exclusivity could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operation.

Although we have obtained rare pediatric disease designation for nomlabofusp, we may not be eligible to receive a priority review voucher in the event the FDA determines we no longer meet the criteria for designation, revokes the designation or FDA approval does not occur prior to September 30, 2026.

The sponsor of an application for a rare pediatric disease drug product may be eligible for a voucher that can be used or sold to obtain a priority review for a subsequent application submitted under section 505(b)(1) of the FDCA or section 351 of the PHS Act. The rare pediatric disease priority review voucher program was most recently reauthorized by Congress through September 30, 2024, with the potential for priority review vouchers to be granted through September 30, 2026. We received rare pediatric disease designation from the FDA for nomlabofusp in 2019. We may, in the future, apply for rare pediatric disease designation from the FDA for future product candidates that may qualify for designation. Vouchers for rare pediatric disease drugs are awarded for qualifying applications when the drug receives approval.

Although nomlabofusp has received rare pediatric disease designation, nomlabofusp may not receive a priority review voucher for a number of reasons: nomlabofusp may not receive approval; nomlabofusp may receive approval in adults, but not pediatric patients; nomlabofusp may not meet the eligibility requirements for a priority voucher at the time we seek approval for nomlabofusp; or we may not meet the current deadline for receiving a priority review voucher (September 30, 2026), in which case we would not be able to obtain a voucher unless Congress further reauthorizes the program. Finally, a rare pediatric disease designation does not necessarily lead to faster development or regulatory review of the product or increase the likelihood that it will receive marketing approval. If we apply for designation for future product candidates as drugs for rare pediatric diseases, the FDA may not grant the designation. The failure to maintain rare pediatric disease designation for nomlabofusp or if FDA approval does not occur prior to September 30, 2026 could result in the inability to receive a priority review voucher which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

If we fail to maintain PRIME designation in the European Union for nomlabofusp, our competitive position would be harmed.

The PRIME scheme is open to medicines under development and for which the applicant intends to apply for an initial MAA through the centralized procedure. Eligible products must target conditions for which where is an unmet medical need (there is no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment in the European Union or, if there is, the new medicine will bring a major therapeutic advantage) and they must demonstrate the potential to address the unmet medical need by introducing new methods or therapy or improving existing ones. Applicants will typically be at the exploratory clinical trial phase of development and will have preliminary clinical evidence in patients to demonstrate the promising activity of the medicine and its potential to address to a significant extent an unmet medical need. In exceptional cases, applicants from the academic sector or SMEs may submit an eligibility request at an earlier stage of development if compelling non-clinical data in a relevant model provide early evidence of promising activity to establish proof of principle, and first in man studies indicate adequate exposure for the desired pharmacotherapeutic effects and tolerability.

If a medicine is selected for the PRIME scheme, the EMA:

For SMEs who enter the scheme based on data showing proof of principle, the appointment of the rapporteur occurs once they have generated data confirming eligibility at proof of concept stage. They are required to submit relevant data and justification as the product development reaches this stage.

Medicines that are selected for the PRIME scheme are also expected to benefit from EMA’s accelerated assessment procedure at the time of application for marketing authorization. Where, during the course of development, a medicine no longer meets the eligibility criteria, or if a medicine granted early access to the PRIME scheme cannot later demonstrate proof of concept, support under the PRIME scheme may be withdrawn. Approval of other therapies for the treatment Friedreich’s ataxia, including the recent approval of omaveloxolone could negatively impact our continued access to this and similar programs. Loss of PRIME designation for nomlabofusp or

the failure to obtain such designation for any future product candidates could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operation.

Changes in regulatory requirements, FDA guidance, guidance from other regulatory authorities or unanticipated events during our non-clinical or clinical trials of nomlabofusp or future product candidates may result in changes to clinical trial protocols or additional non-clinical or clinical trial requirements, which could result in increased costs to us and could delay our development timeline.

Changes in regulatory requirements, FDA guidance or guidance from EMA or unanticipated events during our non-clinical or clinical trials may force us to terminate or adjust our clinical programs. The FDA, or other applicable regulatory authorities may impose additional clinical trial and/or non-clinical study requirements. Amendments to our clinical trial protocols would require resubmission to the FDA, or the applicable regulatory authorities as well as IRBs and ethics committees for review and approval, which may adversely impact the cost, timing or successful completion of a clinical trial. If we experience delays completing, or if we terminate, any of our clinical trials, or if we are required to conduct additional clinical trials, or non-clinical studies and/or post-market studies, the commercial prospects for nomlabofusp or any other potential product candidates may be harmed and our ability to generate product revenue will be delayed or eliminated, and it would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In order to market any product outside of the United States, we must comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries regarding drug development and commercialization. The approval processes varies from country to country and can involve additional product testing and additional administrative review periods. The time required to obtain approval in other countries might differ from and be longer than that required to obtain FDA approval. Regulatory approval in one country does not ensure regulatory approval in another, but a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one country may negatively impact the regulatory process in others. Even if we receive marketing approval for nomlabofusp in the United States, we may never receive regulatory approval to market nomlabofusp outside of the United States.

Disruptions at the FDA and other government agencies caused by funding shortages or global health concerns could hinder their ability to hire, retain or deploy key leadership and other personnel, or otherwise prevent new or modified products from being developed, approved or commercialized in a timely manner or at all, which could negatively impact our business.

The ability of the FDA to review and/or approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, statutory, regulatory, and policy changes, the FDA’s ability to hire and retain key personnel, and accept the payment of user fees, and other events that may otherwise affect the FDA’s ability to perform routine functions. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable.

Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies may also slow the time necessary for new drugs to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. Furthermore, government shutdowns could also impact the ability of regulatory authorities and government agencies to function normally and support our operations. For example, the U.S. federal government has shut down repeatedly since 1980, including for a period of 35 days beginning on December 22, 2018. During a shutdown, certain regulatory authorities and agencies, such as the FDA, have had to furlough key personnel and stop critical activities.

If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, or if global health concerns prevent the FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA or other regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Regulatory requirements governing biologic products have changed frequently and may continue to change in the future. Such requirements may lengthen the regulatory review process, require us to perform additional non-clinical studies or clinical trials, and increase our costs, or may force us to delay, limit or terminate certain of our programs.

Regulatory requirements governing biologic drug products are evolving and may continue to change in the future. As a result, it is difficult to determine how long it will take or how much it will cost to obtain regulatory approvals for nomlabofusp for the treatment of FA or any other future protein replacement therapy product candidates in any indication, if at all. Regulatory review agencies and the new requirements and guidelines they promulgate may lengthen the regulatory review process, require us to perform additional or larger studies, increase

our development costs, lead to changes in regulatory positions and interpretations, delay or prevent approval and commercialization of our product candidates or lead to significant post-approval studies, limitations or restrictions. Legislative and regulatory proposals have been made to expand post-approval requirements and restrict sales and promotional activities for pharmaceutical products. We cannot be sure whether additional legislative changes will be enacted, or whether FDA regulations, guidance or interpretations will be changed, or what the impact of such changes on the marketing approvals of our product candidates, if any, may be. In addition, increased scrutiny by the U.S. Congress of the FDA’s approval process may significantly delay or prevent marketing approval, as well as subject us to more stringent product labeling and post-marketing testing and other requirements.

Delays, failure or unexpected costs in obtaining, the regulatory approval necessary to bring our product candidates to market could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

In addition, the clinical trial requirements of the FDA, the EMA and other regulatory authorities and the criteria these regulators use to determine the safety and efficacy of a product candidate vary substantially according to the type, complexity, novelty and intended use and market of such product candidates. The regulatory approval process for novel product candidates such as ours can be more expensive and take longer than for other, better known or more extensively studied product candidates.

The clinical trials of nomlabofusp and any future product candidates are, and the manufacturing and marketing of nomlabofusp and any future product candidates, will be subject to extensive and rigorous review and regulation by numerous government authorities in the United States and in other countries, such as within the European Union, where we intend to seek regulatory approval of, and market, any product candidates.

Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of any product candidate, we must demonstrate through non-clinical testing and clinical trials that the product candidate is safe and effective for use in each target indication. This process can take many years. In addition, approval policies, regulations, or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a product candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions, which may cause delays in the approval of or may result in the decision not to approve our product candidates. We have not obtained regulatory approval for nomlabofusp, and it is possible that this product candidate or any product candidates we may seek to develop in the future will never obtain regulatory approval. If marketing approval is obtained, it will likely include post-marketing studies, and other post-marketing requirements, and surveillance such as REMS which will require the expenditure of substantial resources beyond the proceeds we currently have on hand.

Furthermore, we are not permitted to market nomlabofusp in the United States, or the European Union until we receive approval of a BLA from the FDA or a MAA from the EMA, or in any other foreign countries until we receive the requisite marketing approval from such countries. The development of drugs for FA or other rare diseases may require initial non-clinical studies, early and usually smaller, clinical trials and randomized, double-blind placebo controlled long-term safety and efficacy trials in order to test the safety and efficacy of the drug.

Nomlabofusp requires substantial further clinical development before we can submit a BLA to the FDA. Development and/or regulatory programs for nomlabofusp in any countries other than the United States (such as a MAA to the EMA) are only in very preliminary stages and may require substantial further development in those countries prior to regulatory submissions seeking regulatory approval for marketing.

Even after successful completion of clinical trials, there is a risk that the FDA or other regulatory agencies may request further information from us, disagree with our findings or otherwise undertake a lengthy review of our submission.

The FDA and certain European regulatory authorities may delay, limit or deny testing or approval of nomlabofusp for many reasons, including, among others:

Any of these factors, many of which are beyond our control, could jeopardize our ability to obtain and/or maintain regulatory approval for and successfully market nomlabofusp. Any delay or failure in obtaining required approvals could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. This process can take many years and will likely require the expenditure of substantial resources. Of the large number of drugs in development in the United States, only a small percentage will successfully complete the FDA regulatory approval process and be commercialized. It is possible that the FDA or other regulatory agencies will not approve any application that we submit. It is possible that our product candidates may not obtain appropriate regulatory approvals necessary for us to commence clinical trials for our product candidates. Accordingly, even if we are able to obtain the requisite financing to continue to fund our development and clinical trials, we cannot ensure that nomlabofusp, or any other of our potential product candidates will be successfully developed or commercialized.

We are subject to healthcare laws and regulations, and health information privacy and security laws, which could expose us to criminal sanctions, civil penalties, contractual damages, reputational harm and diminished profits and future earnings.

Healthcare providers, physicians and others will play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of nomlabofusp or any potential product candidates, if approved. Our future arrangements with third-party payors will expose us broadly to applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations that may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we market, sell and distribute nomlabofusp or potential product candidates, if we obtain marketing approval. In addition, we may be subject to patient privacy regulation by both the federal government and the states or other countries in which we conduct our business. For more information, see the section of this report titled “Business – Healthcare Laws and Regulations – Other Healthcare Laws.”

Ensuring that our future business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations could be costly. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices do not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations, including anticipated activities to be conducted by our sales team, were found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines and exclusion from

government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, any of which could substantially disrupt our operations and would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. If any of the physicians or other providers or entities with whom we expect to do business is found not to be in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

Healthcare legislation, including potentially unfavorable pricing regulations or other healthcare reform initiatives may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain marketing approval of and commercialize our product candidates.

The commercial potential for our approved products, if any, could be affected by changes in healthcare spending and policy in the United States and abroad. We operate in a highly regulated industry. New laws, regulations or judicial decisions or new interpretations of existing laws, regulations or decisions, related to healthcare availability, the method of delivery or payment for healthcare products and services could adversely affect our business, operations and financial condition. The United States and many foreign jurisdictions have enacted or proposed legislative and regulatory changes affecting the healthcare system that may affect our ability to profitably sell our product and product candidates, if approved. The United States government, state legislatures and foreign governments also have shown significant interest in implementing cost-containment programs to limit the growth of government-paid healthcare costs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products for branded prescription drugs. The pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives. Previously, in March 2010, the ACA was enacted, which was intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for health care and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms. Healthcare reform initiatives recently culminated in the enactment of the IRA Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 or IRA, which, among other things, allow allows HHS to directly negotiate the ceiling price of a statutorily specified number of drugs and biologic each year that CMS reimburses under Medicare Part B and Part D, requires the payment of rebates on Medicare Part B and Part D drugs whose prices have increased at a rate faster than the rate of inflation, and redesign the Medicare Part D cost sharing structure, including revising manufacturer financial liability for covered products. For more information, see the section of this report titled “Business – Healthcare Laws and Regulations – Healthcare Reform.”

We expect that additional federal, state and foreign healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in limited coverage and reimbursement and reduced demand for our products, once approved, or additional pricing pressures.

Even if approved, reimbursement policies could limit our ability to sell product candidates that we elect to sell on our own.

If approved by regulatory authorities, market acceptance and sales of product candidates that we elect to sell on our own will depend on reimbursement policies and may be affected by healthcare reform measures. Government authorities and third-party payors, such as private health insurers and health maintenance organizations, decide which medications they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels for those medications. Cost containment is a primary concern in the U.S. healthcare industry and elsewhere. Government authorities and these third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medications. We cannot be sure that reimbursement will be available for nomlabofusp, if approved, or future product candidates that we elect to sell on our own and, if reimbursement is available, the level of such reimbursement. Reimbursement may impact the demand for, or the price of, product candidates that we elect to sell. If reimbursement is not available or is available only at limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize product candidates that we elect to sell. For more information, see the section of this report titled “Business – Healthcare Laws and Regulations – Coverage and Reimbursement.”

In some foreign countries, particularly in Canada and European countries, the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject to strict governmental control. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take six to 12 months or longer after the receipt of regulatory approval and product launch. To obtain favorable reimbursement for the indications sought or pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of product candidates that we elect to sell on our own

with other available therapies. If reimbursement for product candidates that we elect to sell on our own is unavailable in any country in which we seek reimbursement, if it is limited in scope or amount, if it is conditioned upon our completion of additional clinical trials, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, our business, financial conditions and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

Even if we obtain marketing approval for a product candidate, our product candidates will remain subject to regulatory oversight.

Even if we receive marketing approval for nomlabofusp or a future product candidate, regulatory authorities may still impose significant restrictions on the indicated uses or marketing or impose ongoing requirements for potentially costly post-approval studies. Nomlabofusp or future product candidates will also be subject to ongoing regulatory requirements for manufacturing, labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion, sampling, record-keeping and submission of safety and other post-market information. The FDA has significant post-market authority, including, for example, the authority to require labeling changes based on new safety information and to require post-market studies or clinical trials to evaluate serious safety risks related to the use of a drug. An unsuccessful post-marketing study or failure to complete such a study could result in the withdrawal of marketing approval. Any regulatory approvals that we receive for nomlabofusp may also be subject to a REMS, limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing, including post-approval clinical trials, and surveillance to monitor the quality, safety and efficacy of the product, all of which could lead to lower sales volume and revenue. For example, the holder of an approved BLA or NDA is obligated to monitor and report adverse events and any failure of a product to meet the specifications in the BLA or NDA. The holder of an approved BLA or NDA also must submit new or supplemental applications and obtain FDA approval for certain changes to the approved product, product labeling or manufacturing process. Advertising and promotional materials must comply with FDA rules and are subject to FDA review, in addition to other potentially applicable federal and state laws.

In addition, product manufacturers and their facilities are subject to payment of user fees and continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with cGMP requirements and adherence to commitments made in the BLA or NDA or foreign marketing application. If we, or a regulatory authority, discover(s) previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where the product is manufactured or if a regulatory authority disagrees with the promotion, marketing or labeling of that product, a regulatory authority may impose restrictions relative to that product, the manufacturing facility or us, including requiring recall or withdrawal of the product from the market or suspension of manufacturing.

If we or our contractors fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements following approval of nomlabofusp, a regulatory authority may:

Any government investigation of alleged violations of law could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity. The occurrence of any event or penalty described above may inhibit our ability to commercialize nomlabofusp, if approved, and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

In addition, the FDA’s policies, and those of equivalent foreign regulatory agencies, may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of nomlabofusp. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability, which would materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Even if we receive marketing approval for nomlabofusp in the United States, we may never receive regulatory approval to market nomlabofusp outside of the United States.

We may pursue marketing approval for nomlabofusp in the United States, the European Union and in other jurisdictions worldwide. In order to market any product outside of the United States, we must establish and comply with the numerous and varying safety, efficacy and other regulatory requirements of other jurisdictions, including potential additional clinical trials and/or non-clinical studies. Approval procedures vary among jurisdictions and can involve additional testing and additional administrative review periods. The time required to obtain approvals in other jurisdictions might differ from that required to obtain FDA approval. The marketing approval processes in other jurisdictions may implicate all of the risks detailed above regarding FDA approval in the United States as well as other risks. In particular, in many countries outside of the United States, products must receive pricing and reimbursement approval before the product can be commercialized. Obtaining this approval can result in substantial delays in bringing products to market in such countries. Marketing approval in one jurisdiction does not necessarily ensure marketing approval in another, but a failure or delay in obtaining marketing approval in one country may have a negative effect on the regulatory process or commercial activities in others. Failure to obtain marketing approval in other countries or any delay or other setback in obtaining such approval would impair our ability to market a product candidate in such foreign markets. Any such impairment would reduce the size of our potential market, which could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Our future growth depends, in part, on our ability to penetrate foreign markets, where we would be subject to additional regulatory burdens and other risks and uncertainties.

The prevalence of FA is estimated to be approximately three times greater in the European Union than in the United States, and, therefore, represents our largest potential market for nomlabofusp. Our future profitability will depend, in part, on our ability to commercialize nomlabofusp and future product candidates in the European Union and other foreign markets for which we may rely on collaborations with third parties. If we commercialize a product candidate in foreign markets, we would be subject to additional risks and uncertainties, including:

Sales in the European Union and other foreign markets of a product candidate could also be adversely affected by the imposition of governmental controls, political and economic instability, trade restrictions and changes in tariffs.

If we are unable to establish sales and marketing capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell nomlabofusp, if approved, we may not be able to generate any revenue.

We do not currently have an established infrastructure for the sales, marketing and distribution of biologic or drug products in the United States or foreign countries. In order to market a product candidate, if approved by the FDA or any other regulatory authority, we must build our sales, marketing, managerial and other non-technical capabilities or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services. If we are unable to establish adequate sales, marketing and distribution capabilities, whether independently or with third parties, or if we are unable to do so on commercially reasonable terms, our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects will be materially adversely affected.

Even if we receive marketing approval for nomlabofusp, we may not achieve broad market acceptance, which would limit the revenue that we generate from our sales.

The commercial success of nomlabofusp, if developed and approved for marketing by the FDA or EMA or other applicable regulatory authorities, will depend upon the market size for, and the awareness and acceptance of nomlabofusp among the medical community, including physicians, patients, advocacy groups and healthcare payors. Market acceptance of nomlabofusp, if approved, will depend on a number of factors, including, among others:

If nomlabofusp is approved but does not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by patients, advocacy groups, physicians and payors, we may not generate sufficient revenue from nomlabofusp to become or remain profitable and our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected. Our efforts to educate the medical community and third-party payors about the benefits of nomlabofusp may require significant resources and may never be successful.

The FDA and other regulatory agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses. If we are found to have improperly promoted off-label uses, we may become subject to significant liability.

The FDA and other regulatory agencies strictly regulate the promotional claims that may be made about prescription products, such as nomlabofusp or any potential product candidates, if approved. If we receive marketing approval for nomlabofusp, or any potential product candidates, physicians may prescribe our product candidates to their patients in a manner that is inconsistent with the approved label. If we are found to have promoted such off-label uses, we may become subject to significant liability. The federal government has levied large civil and criminal fines against companies for alleged improper promotion and has enjoined several companies from engaging in off-label promotion and required that they enter into corporate integrity agreements with the Office of Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services. The FDA has also requested that companies enter into consent decrees or permanent injunctions under which specified promotional conduct is changed or curtailed. If we cannot successfully manage the promotion of nomlabofusp or any potential product candidates, if approved, we could become subject to significant liability, which would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Additional competing technologies could emerge, adversely affecting our opportunity to generate revenue from the sale of nomlabofusp, if approved.

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are intensely competitive and subject to rapid and significant technological change. For example, omaveloxolone, was approved for the treatment of FA in adults and adolescents aged 16 and older by the FDA and the European Commission in February 2023 and February 2024, respectively. We expect nomlabofusp, if approved, will compete with omaveloxolone and other new, future approved products and may need to demonstrate compelling advantages in efficacy, convenience, tolerability and safety to be commercially successful. Other competitive factors, including biosimilar and gene therapy competition, could force us to lower prices or could result in reduced sales. Many of our current or potential competitors, either alone or with strategic partners, have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, non-clinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals, and marketing approved products than we do. New products developed by others could emerge as competitors to nomlabofusp or any other potential product candidates, resulting in nomlabofusp or other product candidates being obsolete before we are able to recover expenses incurred in connection with their development or realize revenues from any commercialized product. The pricing of our current product candidate, if and when approved for marketing, will depend, in part, on the pricing strategies adopted by our competitors. If these or other companies enact pricing strategies that impact the price we can charge for our product candidate, if approved, we may reduce our prices and our revenue and results of operations could be affected. Any new product could also affect our ability to recruit and retain clinical trial patients, to obtain and maintain designations or eligibility for expedited regulatory pathways, and to commercialize current and future product candidates. Given that we are still in a relatively early phase of development for nomlabofusp, the recent approval and commercialization of omaveloxolone and the approval of any future competing technologies could provide competitors with a significant competitive advantage and may create an additional barrier to market acceptance of nomlabofusp. If we are not able to compete effectively against our current and future competitors, our business will not grow and our financial condition and results of operations will be adversely affected.

Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established

companies. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient, or are less expensive than any products that we may develop. Our competitors also may obtain FDA, EMA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours and may obtain orphan product exclusivity from the FDA for indications our product candidates are targeting, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. Additionally, products or technologies developed by our competitors may render our potential product candidates uneconomical or obsolete, and we may not be successful in marketing any product candidates we may develop against competitors.

We may face competition from biosimilars and may face increasing competition over time.

We may face competition from biosimilars in both the United States and Europe, and over time we may face increasing biosimilar competition. To the extent that governments adopt more permissive approval frameworks and competitors are able to obtain broader or expedited marketing approval for biosimilars, the rate of increased competition for our biologic drug products could accelerate. Expiration or successful challenge of applicable patent rights could trigger such competition, and we could face more litigation regarding the validity and/or scope of our patents. Our products may also experience greater competition from lower cost biosimilars or generics that come to market when branded products that compete with our products lose their own patent protection.

In the European Union, the European Commission has granted marketing authorizations for biosimilars pursuant to a set of general and product class-specific guidelines for biosimilar approvals issued in 2005. In addition, in an effort to spur biosimilar utilization and/or increase potential healthcare savings, some countries in the European Union have adopted biosimilar uptake measures such as requiring physician prescribing quotas or promoting switching or pharmacy substitution of biosimilars for the corresponding reference products, and other countries may adopt similar measures. Some countries in the European Union may impose automatic price reductions upon market entry of the second or third biosimilar competitor.

In the United States, the ACA authorized the FDA to approve biosimilars via a separate, abbreviated pathway. A growing number of companies have announced that they are in varying stages of development of biosimilar versions of existing biotechnology products. Some companies pursuing development of biosimilars may challenge our patents well in advance of the expiration of our material patents. The U.S. pathway includes the option for biosimilar products meeting certain criteria to be approved as interchangeable with their reference products. Some companies developing biosimilars may seek to register their products as interchangeable biologics, which could make it easier for prescribers or pharmacists to substitute those biosimilars for our products. In addition, critics of the 12-year exclusivity period in the biosimilar pathway law will likely continue to seek to shorten the data exclusivity period and/or to encourage the FDA to interpret narrowly the law’s provisions regarding which new products receive data exclusivity. While we are unable to predict the precise impact of biosimilars, we expect in the future for there to be greater competition in the United States as a result of biosimilars and downward pressure on product prices and sales. These biosimilars or generics may affect the tier designation by third party payors and may require prior authorization for use of nomlabofusp, thereby adding barriers to access. This additional competition could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Risks Related to Our Business

If we are unable to manage expected growth in the scale and complexity of our operations, including attracting and hiring additional qualified management, our performance may suffer.

We are an early-stage clinical biotechnology company with a small number of employees, and our management systems currently in place are not likely to be adequate to support our future growth plans. As a result, we are highly dependent on our management and scientific personnel. The loss of the services of any of our executive officers, other key employees or consultants and other scientific advisors in the foreseeable future, might impede the achievement of our research, development and commercialization objectives. Competition for qualified personnel in the biopharmaceutical field is intense due to the limited number of individuals who possess the skills and experience required by our industry. We will need to continue to hire additional personnel as we expand our clinical development and if we initiate commercial activities. We may not be able to attract and retain quality personnel on acceptable terms, or at all. In addition, to the extent we hire personnel from competitors, we may be

subject to allegations that they have been improperly solicited or that they have divulged proprietary or other confidential information, or that their former employers own their research output.

We rely on consultants and advisors, including scientific, non-clinical, manufacturing and clinical advisors, to assist us in formulating our development and commercialization strategy. These consultants and advisors may be employed by other employers and may have commitments under consulting or advisory contracts with other entities that may limit their availability to us. In addition, a possible future pandemic, epidemic or outbreak of an infectious disease may pose a risk to our ability to retain and rely on our executive officers and key employees, including the potential that one or more of such employees or members of their families may contract the virus, which could impact the ability of such employees to perform as expected, which in turn would adversely impact our current and planned operations.

Recruiting and retaining qualified scientific, medical clinical, manufacturing, quality assurance, regulatory, legal, public company financial, business, sales, marketing and commercial personnel and implementing and improving our operational, financial and management systems will be critical to our ability to grow and succeed. These demands also will require the hiring of additional executive or management-level personnel or the development of additional expertise by our senior management personnel. Hiring a significant number of additional employees, particularly those at the executive or management level, would increase our expenses significantly. In addition, we may not be able to attract and retain these personnel on acceptable terms given the competition among numerous pharmaceutical companies for similar personnel. We also experience competition for the hiring of scientific personnel from universities and research institutions. Moreover, delays or failures in clinical trials may also make it more challenging to recruit and retain qualified scientific personnel. If we are unable to continue to attract and retain high quality personnel, our ability to pursue our business strategy will be limited and our business, financial condition and results of operations would be adversely affected.

Further, if we fail to expand and enhance our operational, financial, management and compliance systems in conjunction with potential future growth, such failure could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. We may be unable to successfully implement these tasks on a larger scale and, accordingly, may not achieve our research, development, business and growth goals.

We may acquire businesses or products, or form strategic alliances, in the future, and we may not realize the benefits of such acquisitions or alliances.

We may acquire additional businesses or products, form strategic alliances or create joint ventures with third parties that we believe will complement or augment our existing business. If we acquire businesses with promising markets or technologies, we may not be able to realize the benefit of such transactions if we are unable to successfully integrate such businesses with our existing operations and company culture.

We may encounter numerous difficulties in developing, manufacturing and marketing any new products resulting from a strategic alliance or acquisition that delays or prevents us from realizing their expected benefits or enhancing our business. We cannot be certain that, following any such transaction, we will achieve the expected synergies to justify the transaction and it could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may seek to establish collaborations and, if we are not able to establish them on commercially reasonable terms, we may have to alter our development and commercialization plans or expand our internal efforts and growth.

Our development programs and the potential commercialization of our product candidates will require substantial additional cash to fund expenses. For nomlabofusp, and any future product candidates, we may decide to collaborate with pharmaceutical and/or biotechnology companies for the development and potential commercialization of those product candidates in some or all markets.

We face significant competition in seeking appropriate collaborators. Whether we reach a definitive agreement for a collaboration for nomlabofusp or other potential product candidates will depend, among other things, upon our assessment of the collaborator’s resources and expertise, the terms and conditions of the proposed collaboration and the proposed collaborator’s evaluation of a number of factors. Those factors may include the design or results of clinical trials, the likelihood of approval by the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside the United States, the potential market for the applicable product candidate, the costs and complexities of manufacturing and delivering such product candidate to patients, the potential of competing products, the existence of uncertainty

with respect to our ownership of technology, which can exist if there is a challenge to such ownership without regard to the merits of the challenge and industry and market conditions generally. The collaborator may also consider alternative product candidates or technologies for similar indications that may be available to collaborate on and whether such collaboration could be more attractive than the one with us for our product candidate. The terms of any collaboration or other arrangement that we may establish may not be favorable to us.

We may also be restricted under existing license agreements from entering into future agreements on certain terms with potential collaborators. Collaborations are complex and time-consuming to negotiate and document. In addition, there have been a significant number of recent business combinations among large pharmaceutical companies that have resulted in a reduced number of potential future collaborators.

We may not be able to negotiate collaborations on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable or unwilling to do so, we may have to curtail the development potential product candidates for which we are seeking to collaborate, reduce or delay our development program or one or more of our other development programs, delay potential commercialization in some or all markets or reduce the scope of any sales or marketing activities, or increase our expenditures and undertake development or commercialization activities at our own expense, including potentially increasing our infrastructure and investment outside the United States. If we elect to increase our expenditures to fund development or commercialization activities on our own, we will need to obtain additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms if at all. If we do not have sufficient funds, we may not be able to further develop our product candidates or bring them to market and generate product revenue. In addition, such efforts may require diversion of a disproportionate amount of our attention away from other day-to-day activities and require devotion of a substantial amount of our time to managing these activities.

In addition, any future collaborations that we enter into may not be successful. The success of our collaboration arrangements will depend heavily on the efforts and activities of our collaborators. Collaborators generally have significant discretion in determining the efforts and resources that they will apply to these collaborations. Disagreements between parties to a collaboration arrangement regarding clinical development and commercialization matters can lead to delays in the development process or commercializing the applicable product candidate and, in some cases, termination of the collaboration arrangement. These disagreements can be difficult to resolve if neither of the parties has final decision-making authority. Collaborations with pharmaceutical or biotechnology companies and other third parties often are terminated or allowed to expire by the other party. Any such termination or expiration could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and could harm our business reputation.

We face risks related to health epidemics, and/or other outbreaks of communicable diseases, which could significantly disrupt our operations and may materially and adversely affect our business and financial conditions.

Our business could be adversely impacted by the effects of a global pandemic, epidemic or outbreak of an infectious disease, such as, for example, a possible resurgence of vaccine resistant or more highly contagious or deadly variants of COVID-19 and the efforts to mitigate such outbreaks. Such global outbreaks of communicable diseases globally could materially and adversely impact our operations, including without limitation, our manufacturing and supply chain for nomlabofusp and our planned clinical trials, which could continue to face, enrollment difficulties as hospitals or clinical trials sites experience closures. Because FA is a rare disease, there are a limited number of patients in close proximity to clinical trial sites and clinical trial patients travel from throughout the United States to clinical trial sites to participate. Any travel advisories or infection risks could present increased risks to patients traveling to a clinical trial site for dosing if clinical trials are allowed to continue. These events could delay our clinical trials, increase the cost of completing our clinical trials and negatively impact the integrity, reliability or robustness of the data from our clinical trials. In addition, employee health and availability could be impacted, which may have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Future pandemics could adversely affect global economies and financial markets resulting in an economic downturn that could have a material adverse effect on our business and prospects.

We are subject to stringent and evolving U.S. and foreign laws, regulations and rules, contractual obligations, industry standards, policies and other obligations related to data privacy and security. Our actual or perceived failure to comply with such obligations could lead to regulatory investigations or actions; litigation; fines and penalties; disruptions of our business operations; reputational harm; loss of revenue or profits; and other adverse business consequences.

In the ordinary course of business, we collect, receive, store, process, generate, use, transfer, disclose, make accessible, protect, secure, dispose of, transmit, and share (collectively, process) personal data and other sensitive information, including proprietary and confidential business data, trade secrets, intellectual property, data we collect about trial participants in connection with clinical trials, sensitive third-party data, business plans, transactions, financial information and medical information collected by our patient access management team (collectively, sensitive data). Our data processing activities may subject us to numerous data privacy and security obligations, such as various laws, regulations, guidance, industry standards, external and internal privacy and security policies, contractual requirements, and other obligations relating to data privacy and security.

In the United States, federal, state, and local governments have enacted numerous data privacy and security laws, including data breach notification laws, personal data privacy laws, consumer protection laws (e.g., Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act), and other similar laws (e.g., wiretapping laws). For example, HIPAA, as amended by HITECH, imposes specific requirements relating to the privacy, security, and transmission of individually identifiable health information. Additionally, in the past few years, numerous U.S. states—including California, Virginia, Colorado, Connecticut, and Utah—have enacted comprehensive privacy laws that impose certain obligations on covered businesses, including providing specific disclosures in privacy notices and affording residents with certain rights concerning their personal data. As applicable, such rights may include the right to access, correct, or delete certain personal data, and to opt-out of certain data processing activities, such as targeted advertising, profiling, and automated decision-making. The exercise of these rights may impact our business and ability to provide our products and services. Certain states also impose stricter requirements for processing certain personal data, including sensitive information, such as conducting data privacy impact assessments. These state laws allow for statutory fines for noncompliance. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (CPRA) (collectively, CCPA) requires businesses to provide specific disclosures in privacy notices and honor requests of California residents to exercise certain privacy rights. The CCPA provides for fines of up to $7,500 per intentional violation and allows private litigants affected by certain data breaches to recover significant statutory damages. Although some U.S. comprehensive privacy laws exempt some data processed in the context of clinical trials, these laws may increase compliance costs and potential liability with respect to other personal data we may maintain about California residents. Similar laws are being considered in several other states, as well as at the federal and local levels, and we expect more jurisdictions to pass similar laws in the future.

Outside the United States, an increasing number of laws, regulations, and industry standards may govern data privacy and security. For example, the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (EU GDPR), United Kingdom’s GDPR (UK GDPR) (collectively, the GDPR), Brazil’s General Data Protection Law (Lei Geral de Proteção de Dados Pessoais, or LGPD) (Law No. 13,709/2018), and China’s Personal Information Protection Law (PIPL) impose strict requirements for processing personal data. For example, under the GDPR, companies may face temporary or definitive bans on data processing and other corrective actions; fines of up to 20 million Euros under the EU GDPR / 17.5 million pounds sterling under the UK GDPR or 4% of annual global revenue, whichever is greater; or private litigation related to processing of personal data brought by classes of data subjects or consumer protection organizations authorized at law to represent their interests.

The Swiss Federal Act on Data Protection, or the FADP, also applies to the collection and processing of personal data, including health-related information, by companies located in Switzerland, or in certain circumstances, by companies located outside of Switzerland. The FADP has been revised and adopted by the Swiss Parliament. Companies must comply with the revised version of the FADP and its revised ordinances from September 1, 2023, which may result in an increase of costs of compliance, risks of noncompliance and penalties for noncompliance.

In addition, we may be unable to transfer personal data from Europe and other jurisdictions to the United States or other countries due to data localization requirements or limitations on cross-border data flows. Europe and other jurisdictions have enacted laws requiring data to be localized or limiting the transfer of personal data to other countries. In particular, the European Economic Area (EEA) and the UK have significantly restricted the transfer of personal data to the United States and other countries whose privacy laws it believes are inadequate. Other jurisdictions may adopt similarly stringent interpretations of their data localization and cross-border data transfer laws. Although there are currently various mechanisms that may be used to transfer personal data from the EEA and UK to the United States in compliance with law, such as the EEA standard contractual clauses, the UK’s International Data Transfer Agreement / Addendum, and the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework and the UK extension thereto (which allows for transfers to relevant U.S.-based organizations who self-certify compliance and

participate in the Framework), these mechanisms are subject to legal challenges, and there is no assurance that we can satisfy or rely on these measures to lawfully transfer personal data to the United States. If there is no lawful manner for us to transfer personal data from the EEA, the UK, or other jurisdictions to the United States, or if the requirements for a legally-compliant transfer are too onerous, we could face significant adverse consequences, including by limiting our ability to conduct clinical trial activities in Europe and elsewhere, the interruption or degradation of our operations, the need to relocate part of or all of our business or data processing activities to other jurisdictions (such as Europe) at significant expense, increased exposure to regulatory actions, substantial fines and penalties, the inability to transfer data and work with partners, vendors and other third parties, and injunctions against our processing or transferring of personal data necessary to operate our business. Some European regulators have ordered certain companies to suspend or permanently cease certain transfers of personal data to recipients outside Europe for allegedly violating the GDPR’s cross-border data transfer limitations. Additionally, companies that transfer personal data to recipients outside of the EEA and/or UK to other jurisdictions, particularly to the United States, are subject to increased scrutiny from regulators individual litigants and activist groups.

In addition to data privacy and security laws, we may be contractually subject to industry standards adopted by industry groups and may become subject to such obligations in the future. We are also bound by other contractual obligations related to data privacy and security, and our efforts to comply with such obligations may not be successful. We publish privacy policies, marketing materials, and other statements, such as compliance with certain certifications or self-regulatory principles, regarding data privacy and security. If these policies, materials or statements are found to be deficient, lacking in transparency, deceptive, unfair, or misrepresentative of our practices, we may be subject to investigation, enforcement actions by regulators, or other adverse consequences.

Additionally, under various privacy laws and other obligations, we may be required to obtain certain consents to process personal data. For example, some of our data processing practices may be challenged under wiretapping laws, if we obtain consumer information from third parties through various methods, including chatbot and session replay providers, or via third-party marketing pixels. These practices may be subject to increased challenges by class action plaintiffs. Our inability or failure to obtain consent for these practices could result in adverse consequences, including class action litigation and mass arbitration demands.

Obligations related to data privacy and security (and consumers’ data privacy expectations) are quickly changing, becoming increasingly stringent, and creating uncertainty. Additionally, these obligations may be subject to differing applications and interpretations, which may be inconsistent or conflict among jurisdictions. Preparing for and complying with these obligations requires us to devote significant resources and may necessitate changes to our services, information technologies, systems, and practices and to those of any third parties that process personal data on our behalf.

We may at times fail (or be perceived to have failed) in our efforts to comply with our data privacy and security obligations. Moreover, despite our efforts, our personnel or third parties on whom we rely on may fail to comply with such obligations, which could negatively impact our business operations. If we or the third parties on which we rely fail, or are perceived to have failed, to address or comply with applicable data privacy and security obligations, we could face significant consequences, including but not limited to: government enforcement actions (e.g., investigations, fines, penalties, audits, inspections, and similar); litigation (including class-action claims) and mass arbitration demands; additional reporting requirements and/or oversight; bans on processing personal data; and orders to destroy or not use personal data. In particular, plaintiffs have become increasingly more active in bringing privacy-related claims against companies, including class claims. Some of these claims allow for the recovery of statutory damages on a per violation basis, and, if viable, carry the potential for monumental statutory damages, depending on the volume of data and the number of violations. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, or financial condition, including but not limited to loss of customers; inability to process personal data or to operate in certain jurisdictions; limited ability to develop or commercialize our products; expenditure of time and resources to defend any claim or inquiry; adverse publicity; or substantial changes to our business model or operations.

Our internal computer systems, as well as those of CROs, CMOs, vendors, contractors, and consultants, and potential collaborators may experience failures, unauthorized access, or security breaches, potentially causing a material disruption in our product development programs, operations, harm to our brand, significant liabilities, loss of revenue, and additional costs.

Despite implementing comprehensive security measures, both our internal computer systems and those of our contracted third party service providers are susceptible to various threats, including cyber-attacks, computer viruses,

unauthorized access, natural disasters, terrorism, war, and telecommunication and electrical failures. The extensive use of mobile devices accessing confidential information further heightens the risks, leading to potential device loss, security incidents, and data breaches that could result in the loss of confidential information and intellectual property. Any system failure, accident, or security breach causing interruptions in our operations may lead to a material disruption in our product development programs and business operations, potentially requiring substantial resources for recovery. For instance, the loss of clinical trial data from completed trials could lead to delays in regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase costs for data recovery or reproduction.

We are exposed to risks stemming from misappropriation, misuse, leakage, falsification, or intentional or accidental release or loss of information maintained in our information systems and networks, including personal information of our employees. External parties may attempt to penetrate our systems or induce our employees or those of our vendors to disclose sensitive information. As with other companies, we face threats to our data and systems, including malicious codes, viruses, and cyber-attacks. The increasing number and complexity of these threats over time pose a challenge. A material breach in our security or that of our vendors, contractors, or consultants could harm the market perception of our security measures, resulting in business loss and damage to our reputation and credibility. This could significantly adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations, necessitating substantial amounts of money and resources to repair or replace information systems or networks. Despite our continuous efforts, the possibility of such events occurring cannot be entirely eliminated.

In our endeavor to protect systems storing critical information, we have implemented security measures. However, given their size and complexity and the increasing amounts of information maintained, these systems, including our internal information technology systems and those of third-party entities like Contract Research Organizations, Contract Manufacturing Organizations, contractors, and consultants, remain potentially vulnerable to breakdowns, interruptions, and security breaches. Incidents such as service interruptions, system malfunctions, natural disasters, terrorism, war, telecommunication, and electrical failures, as well as security breaches from inadvertent or intentional actions by employees, contractors, consultants, and other third parties, including cyber-attacks by malicious entities, may compromise our system infrastructure. This could lead to the loss, destruction, alteration, or unauthorized access to our data, including trade secrets, confidential information, intellectual property, proprietary business information, and personal information, or data processed or maintained on our behalf. Such incidents could result in financial, legal, business, and reputational harm.

The rise in phishing and social engineering attacks and the increase in remote working further elevate security threats. Any disruption or security incident could lead to loss, damage, or unauthorized access to data, potentially exposing us to litigation and governmental investigations, delaying the development and commercialization of our product candidates, and subjecting us to fines or penalties for noncompliance with privacy and security laws. Notifications and actions following a security incident could impact our reputation and incur significant costs, including legal expenses and remediation. Significant efforts and costs are expected for detection and prevention. Our reliance on third parties for manufacturing introduces an additional layer of risk to our business.

Insurance policies, including a specific policy related to cybersecurity losses, may be insufficient, with potential availability issues in the future, high deductibles, and limitations in coverage, posing challenges in mitigating losses from disruptions, failures, or security breaches.

If our information technology systems or data, and/or those of third parties upon which we rely, are or were compromised, we could experience adverse consequences resulting from such compromise, including but not limited to regulatory investigations or actions, interruptions to operations or clinical trials, reputational harm, litigation, fines and penalties, disruptions of our business operations, and a loss of customers or sales.

In the ordinary course of our business, we, or the third parties upon which we rely, process proprietary, confidential, and sensitive data, including personal data (such as health-related data), intellectual property, and trade secrets.

Cyberattacks, malicious internet-based activity, online and offline fraud and other similar activities threaten the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of our sensitive data and information technology systems, and those of the third parties upon which we rely. These threats are prevalent, continue to rise, and are becoming increasingly difficult to detect. These threats come from a variety of sources, including traditional computer “hackers,” hacktivists, threat actors, personnel misconduct or error (such as through theft or misuse), organized criminal threat actors, sophisticated nation-states, and nation-state-supported actors. Some actors now engage and are expected to continue to engage in cyber-attacks, including without limitation nation-state actors for geopolitical reasons and in

conjunction with military conflicts and defense activities. During times of war and other major conflicts, we and the third parties upon which we rely may be vulnerable to a heightened risk of these attacks, including retaliatory cyber-attacks, that could materially disrupt our systems and operations, supply chain, and ability to produce, sell and distribute our goods and services.

We and the third parties upon which we rely are subject to a variety of evolving threats, including but not limited to, social engineering attacks (including through deep fakes, which may be increasingly more difficult to identify as fake, and phishing attacks), malicious code (such as viruses and worms), malware (including as a result of advanced persistent threat intrusions), denial-of-service attacks, credential stuffing, credential harvesting, personnel misconduct or error, ransomware attacks, supply-chain attacks, software bugs, server malfunction, software or hardware failures, loss of data or other information technology assets, adware, attacks enhanced or facilitated by AI, telecommunications failures, earthquakes, fire, flood, and other similar threats.

Ransomware attacks, including by organized criminal threat actors, nation-states, and nation-state-supported actors, are becoming increasingly prevalent and severe and can lead to significant interruptions, delays, or outages in our operations, disruption of clinical trials or otherwise affecting our ability to provide our products or product candidates, loss of sensitive data (including data related to clinical trials) and income, significant extra expenses to restore data or systems, reputational harm and the diversion of funds. Extortion payments may alleviate the negative impact of a ransomware attack, but we may be unwilling or unable to make such payments (including, for example, if applicable laws or regulations prohibit such payments). Remote work has become more common and has increased risks to our information technology systems and data, as more of our employees work from home, utilizing network connections, computers and devices outside our premises, including at home, while in transit or in public locations. Future business transactions (such as acquisitions or integrations) could expose us to additional cybersecurity risks and vulnerabilities, as our systems could be negatively affected by vulnerabilities present in acquired or integrated entities’ systems and technologies. Furthermore, we may discover security issues that were not found during due diligence of such acquired or integrated entities, and it may be difficult to integrate companies into our information technology environment and security program.

We rely on third-party service providers and technologies to operate critical business systems to process sensitive data in a variety of contexts, including, without limitation, cloud-based infrastructure, drug suppliers, data center facilities, encryption and authentication technology, employee email, content delivery to customers, and other functions. Our ability to monitor these third parties’ information security practices and posture (including whether any unremediated vulnerabilities exist or have been exploited) is limited, and these third parties may not have adequate information security measures in place. In addition, supply-chain attacks have increased in frequency and severity, and we cannot guarantee that third parties’ infrastructure in our supply chain or our third-party partners’ supply chains have not been compromised.

While we have implemented security measures designed to protect against security incidents, there can be no assurance that these measures will be effective. We take steps designed to detect, mitigate, and remediate vulnerabilities in our information security systems (such as our hardware and/or software, including that of third parties upon which we rely). We and the third parties upon which may rely may not, however, detect and remediate all such vulnerabilities including on a timely basis. For example, we have identified certain vulnerabilities in our information systems, and we have taken steps to mitigate the risks associated with known vulnerabilities. These steps include implementing compensating controls and other protective measures. Further, we and the third parties upon which we rely may experience delays in developing and deploying remedial measures and patches designed to address identified vulnerabilities. Vulnerabilities could be exploited and result in a security incident.

Any of the previously identified or similar threats could cause a security incident or other interruption that could result in unauthorized, unlawful, or accidental acquisition, modification, destruction, loss, alteration, encryption, disclosure of, or access to our sensitive information or our information technology systems, or those of the third parties upon whom we rely. A security incident or other interruption could disrupt our ability (and that of third parties upon whom we rely) to provide our products.

We may expend significant resources or fundamentally change our business activities and practices (including our clinical trials) to try to protect against security incidents. Certain data privacy and security obligations may require us to implement and maintain specific security measures or industry-standard or reasonable security measures to protect our information technology systems and sensitive data.

Applicable data privacy and security obligations may require us to notify relevant stakeholders, including affected individuals, customers, regulators, and investors, of security incidents. Such disclosures are costly, and the disclosure or the failure to comply with such requirements could lead to adverse consequences. If we (or a third party upon whom we rely) experience a security incident or are perceived to have experienced a security incident, we may experience adverse consequences. These consequences may include: government enforcement actions (for example, investigations, fines, penalties, audits, and inspections); additional reporting requirements and/or oversight; restrictions on processing sensitive data (including personal data); litigation (including class claims); indemnification obligations; negative publicity; reputational harm; monetary fund diversions; diversion of management attention; interruptions in our operations (including availability of data); financial loss; and other similar harms. Security incidents and attendant consequences may prevent or cause customers to stop using our products, deter new customers from using our products, and negatively impact our ability to grow and operate our business.

In addition to experiencing a security incident, third parties may gather, collect, or infer sensitive data about us from public sources, data brokers or other means that reveals competitively sensitive details about our organization and could be used to undermine our competitive advantage or market position. Additionally, sensitive information of the Company could be leaked, disclosed, or revealed as a result of or in connection with the use of generative AI technologies.

Our contracts may not contain limitations of liability, and even where they do, there can be no assurance that limitations of liability in our contracts are sufficient to protect us from liabilities, damages, or claims related to our data privacy and security obligations.

In addition, our insurance coverage may not be adequate or sufficient in type or amount to protect us from or to mitigate liabilities arising out of our privacy and security practices. The successful assertion of one or more large claims against us that exceeds our available insurance coverage, or results in changes to our insurance policies (including premium increases or the imposition of large deductible or co-insurance requirements), could have an adverse effect on our business.

We face potential product liability exposure, and, if claims are brought against us, we may incur substantial liability.

The use of nomlabofusp and other potential product candidates in clinical trials, if any, and the sale of nomlabofusp and other potential product candidates, if developed and approved, exposes us to the risk of product liability claims. Product liability claims might be brought against us by patients, healthcare providers or others selling or otherwise coming into contact with nomlabofusp or other potential product candidates. For example, we may be sued if any product we develop allegedly causes injury or death or is found to be otherwise unsuitable during product testing, manufacturing, marketing or sale. Physicians and patients may not comply with any warnings that identify known potential adverse effects and patients who should not use our products. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against product liability claims, we may incur substantial liabilities or be required to stop development or, if approved, limit commercialization of our product candidates. Any such product liability claims may include allegations of defects in manufacturing, defects in design, a failure to warn of dangers inherent in the product, including as a result of interactions with alcohol or other drugs, negligence, strict liability and a breach of warranties. Claims could also be asserted under consumer protection acts in other jurisdictions. If we become subject to product liability claims and cannot successfully defend ourselves against them, we could incur substantial liabilities. In addition, regardless of merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims may result in, among other things:

We maintain product liability insurance coverage for our clinical trials with a $5 million aggregate coverage limit. Nevertheless, our insurance coverage may be insufficient to reimburse us for any expenses or losses we may suffer. Moreover, in the future, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses, including if insurance coverage becomes increasingly expensive. If we obtain marketing approval for nomlabofusp or other potential product candidates, we intend to expand our insurance coverage to include the sale of commercial products; however, we may not be able to obtain this product liability insurance on commercially reasonable terms. Large judgments have been awarded in class action lawsuits based on drugs that had unanticipated side effects. The cost of any product liability litigation or other proceedings, even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial, particularly in light of the size of our business and financial resources. A product liability claim or series of claims brought against us could cause our stock price to decline and, if we are unsuccessful in defending such a claim or claims and the resulting judgments exceed our insurance coverage, our financial condition, business, results of operations and prospects could be materially adversely affected.

Risks Related to Our Reliance on Third Parties

We have limited experience in conducting or supervising clinical trials and must outsource all clinical trials. As a result, many important aspects of our drug development programs are outside of our direct control.

We have limited experience in conducting or supervising clinical trials that must be performed to obtain data to submit in concert with applications for approval by the FDA, the EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities. As a result, we expect to continue to rely on CROs, clinical trial sites, clinical data management organizations and consultants to design, conduct, supervise and monitor our non-clinical studies and clinical trials. We, our CROs, and contractors are required to comply with various regulations, including the FDA’s regulations regarding current Good Clinical Practices ("cGCPs") which are enforced by regulatory agencies, including the FDA, and comparable foreign regulatory authorities to ensure the health, safety and rights of patients are protected in clinical development and clinical trials, and that trial data integrity is assured. Regulatory authorities ensure compliance with these requirements through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, principal investigators and clinical trial sites. Our expected reliance on third parties that we do not control does not relieve us of these responsibilities and requirements. If we or any of our CROs, contractors, or clinical trial sites fail to comply with applicable requirements, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot ensure that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our clinical trials comply with such requirements. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with products produced under cGMP requirements, which mandate, among other things, the methods, facilities and controls used in manufacturing, processing and packaging of a drug product to ensure its safety and identity. Failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat non-clinical studies and/or clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process, and could also subject us to enforcement action, up to and including, civil and criminal penalties, which would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our CROs and contractors are not our employees, and except for remedies available to us under our agreements with such CROs and contractors, we cannot control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to our ongoing clinical and non-clinical programs. If our CROs and contractors do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols, regulatory requirements or for other

reasons, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or successfully commercialize our product candidates. As a result, our operations and the commercial prospects for our product candidates would be harmed, our costs could increase and our ability to generate revenue could be delayed or reduced. In addition, operations of our CROs and contractors could be affected by 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. If their facilities are unable to operate because of an accident or incident, even for a short period of time, some or all of our research and development programs may be harmed or delayed, and our operations and financial condition could suffer.

We have less direct control over the conduct, timing and completion of these clinical trials and the management of data developed through the clinical trials than would be the case if we were relying entirely upon our own staff. Communicating with outside parties can also be challenging, potentially leading to mistakes as well as difficulties in coordinating activities. These factors may materially adversely affect the willingness or ability of third parties to conduct our clinical trials and may subject us to unexpected cost increases that are beyond our control. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal and regulatory requirements and scientific standards, and our reliance on CROs and contractors does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities.

In addition, we must, at times, share confidential information with third parties. We seek to protect our proprietary technology in part by entering into confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, material transfer agreements, collaborative research agreements, consulting agreements, or other similar agreements with our collaborators, advisors, employees and consultants prior to beginning research or disclosing proprietary information. These agreements typically limit the rights of the third parties to use or disclose our confidential information, such as trade secrets, intellectual property, data from clinical studies and future development plans. Despite the contractual provisions employed when working with third parties, the need to share confidential information increases the risk that such confidential information become known by our competitors, are inadvertently incorporated into the technology of others, or are disclosed or used in violation of these agreements. Given that our proprietary position is based, in part, on our confidential information, a competitor’s discovery of our confidential information or other unauthorized use or disclosure would impair our competitive position and may have an adverse effect on our business.

Moreover, because we have relied on third parties, our internal capacity to perform these functions is limited. Outsourcing these functions involves risk that third parties may not perform to our standards, may not produce results in a timely manner or may fail to perform at all. We currently have a small number of employees, which limits the internal resources we have available to engage new third-party providers, if necessary, and monitor existing third-party providers. To the extent we are unable to engage new third-party providers, if necessary, and successfully manage the performance of third-party service providers in the future, our business may be adversely affected. Though we carefully manage our relationships with CROs, and contractors there can be no assurance that we will not encounter similar challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operation and prospects.

We rely on third-party supply and manufacturing partners for drug supplies for our research and development, non-clinical activities, and clinical activities, and may do the same for any commercial supplies of our product candidates.

We rely on third-party supply and manufacturing partners to supply the materials and components for, and manufacture, our research and development, non-clinical and clinical study drug substance and drug product. We have not yet manufactured or formulated nomlabofusp or any other product candidate on a commercial scale and may not be able to do so for any of our product candidates. We will work to develop and optimize our manufacturing process; however, we cannot be sure that the process will result in therapies that are safe, potent or effective. Given our reliance on third parties and the risk of manufacturing commercial scale quantities, our ability to adequately commercially launch and/or supply nomlabofusp could be adversely affected.

We do not own manufacturing facilities or supply sources for such components, non-clinical and clinical study drug substance, product and materials, including devices that may be required for administration, but may develop these capabilities in the future. There can be no assurance that our supply of research and development, non-clinical and clinical development of drugs and other materials will not be limited, interrupted, restricted in certain geographic regions or will be of satisfactory quality or continue to be available at acceptable prices. In particular, replacement of any product formulation manufacturer we may engage could require significant effort and expertise

because there may be a limited number of qualified replacements. For example, we rely and expect to continue to rely on a small number of manufacturers to supply us with our requirements for drug substance and formulated drug product related to our nomlabofusp clinical program. The drug substance which is in frozen liquid form for nomlabofusp is currently manufactured for us by a third-party manufacturer, and the frozen liquid form of drug product is made at another manufacturer. We are undertaking a program with a third party manufacturer to begin to produce a lyophilized version of the drug product from the same drug substance, that, once available, we intend to use in certain of our future planned clinical trials. Our research and development programs could be adversely affected by a significant interruption in these manufacturing services or in the supply of drug substance and formulated drugs. In addition, because we rely on multiple manufacturers for our nomlabofusp clinical program, termination of our agreements with any of these manufacturers could significantly adversely impact our current and planned operations.

In the event that any of our suppliers or manufacturers fails to perform their obligations to us in relation to quality, timing or otherwise, or if our supply of components or other materials becomes limited or interrupted for other reasons, we may be forced to manufacture the materials ourselves, for which we currently do not have the capabilities or resources, or enter into an agreement with another third party, which we may not be able to do on reasonable terms, if at all. In some cases, the technical skills or technology required to manufacture our product candidates may be unique or proprietary to the original manufacturer and we may have difficulty, or there may be contractual restrictions prohibiting us from, transferring such skills or technology to another third party and a feasible alternative may not exist. These factors would increase our reliance on such manufacturer or require us to obtain a license from such manufacturer in order to have another third party manufacture our product candidates. If we are required to change manufacturers for any reason, we will be required to verify that the new manufacturer maintains facilities and procedures that comply with quality standards and with all applicable regulations and guidelines. The delays associated with the verification of a new manufacturer could negatively affect our ability to develop product candidates in a timely manner or within budget.

We also rely on third parties to store master and working cell banks. We currently have one master cell bank and one working cell bank for nomlabofusp and believe we would have adequate backup should any cell bank be lost in a catastrophic event. However, it is possible that we could lose multiple cell banks and have our manufacturing severely impacted by the need to replace the cell banks, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may rely on third party manufacturers if we receive regulatory approval for any product candidate. To the extent that we have existing, or enter into future, manufacturing arrangements with third parties, we will depend on these third parties to perform their obligations in a timely manner consistent with contractual and regulatory requirements, including those related to quality control and assurance. If we are unable to obtain or maintain third party manufacturing for product candidates, or to do so on commercially reasonable terms, we may not be able to develop and commercialize our product candidates successfully. Our or a third party’s failure to execute on our manufacturing requirements could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations in a number of ways, including:

We and our contract manufacturers are subject to significant regulation with respect to manufacturing our products. The manufacturing facilities on which we rely may not continue to meet regulatory requirements and have limited capacity.

All entities involved in the preparation of therapeutics for clinical trials or commercial sale, including our existing contract manufacturers for nomlabofusp, are subject to extensive regulation. Some components of a finished therapeutic product approved for commercial sale or used in late-stage clinical trials must be manufactured in accordance with cGMP. These regulations govern manufacturing processes and procedures (including record keeping) and the implementation and operation of quality systems to control and assure the quality of investigational products and products approved for sale. Poor control of production processes can lead to the introduction of adventitious agents or other contaminants, or to inadvertent changes in the properties or stability of our product candidates that may not be detectable in final product testing. We or our contract manufacturers must supply all necessary documentation in support of a BLA or NDA on a timely basis and where required, must adhere to the FDA’s or other regulator’s GLPs and cGMP regulations enforced by the FDA or other regulators through facilities inspection programs. The facilities and quality systems of some or all of our third party contractors must pass a pre-approval inspection for compliance with the applicable regulations as a condition of regulatory approval of nomlabofusp or any of our other potential products. In addition, the regulatory authorities may, at any time, audit or inspect a manufacturing facility involved with the preparation of nomlabofusp or our other potential products or the associated quality systems for compliance with the regulations applicable to the activities being conducted. If these facilities do not pass a pre-approval plant inspection, the FDA or other regulatory approval of the products will not be granted.

The regulatory authorities also may, at any time following approval of a product for sale, audit the manufacturing facilities of our third party contractors. If any such inspection or audit identifies a failure to comply with applicable regulations or if a violation of our product specifications or applicable regulations occurs independent of such an inspection or audit, we or the relevant regulatory authority may require remedial measures that may be costly and/or time-consuming for us or a third party to implement and that may include the temporary or permanent suspension of a clinical trial or commercial sales or the temporary or permanent closure of a facility. Any such remedial measures imposed upon us or third parties with whom we contract could materially harm our business.

If we or any of our third party manufacturers fail to maintain regulatory compliance, the FDA or other regulators can impose regulatory sanctions including, among other things, refusal to approve a pending application for a biologic product, or revocation of a pre-existing approval. As a result, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be materially harmed.

Additionally, if supply from one approved manufacturer is interrupted, there could be a significant disruption in commercial supply. The number of manufacturers with the necessary manufacturing capabilities is limited. In addition, an alternative manufacturer would need to be qualified through a BLA or NDA supplement or similar regulatory submission which could result in further delay. The regulatory agencies may also require additional studies if a new manufacturer is relied upon for commercial production. The delays associated with the verification of a new manufacturer could negatively affect our ability to develop product candidates in a timely manner or within budget.

These factors could also cause the delay of manufacturing development, clinical trials, regulatory submissions, required approvals or commercialization of nomlabofusp or any other product candidates, cause us to incur higher costs and prevent us from commercializing our products successfully. Furthermore, if our suppliers fail to meet contractual requirements, and we are unable to secure one or more replacement suppliers capable of production at a substantially equivalent cost, our clinical trials may be delayed, or we could lose potential revenues. Any of the above would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Changes in methods of product candidate manufacturing may result in additional costs and/or delays.

As product candidates progress through clinical to late-stage clinical trials to marketing approval and commercialization, it is common that various aspects of the development program, such as manufacturing methods, are altered along the way in an effort to optimize yield, manufacturing batch size, change drug product dosage form, minimize costs and achieve consistent quality and results. Such changes carry the risk that they will not achieve these intended objectives. Any of these changes could cause our product candidates to perform differently and affect the results of planned clinical trials or other future clinical trials conducted with the altered materials. This could delay completion of clinical trials, require the conduct of bridging clinical trials or the repetition of one or more clinical trials, increase clinical trial costs, delay approval of our product candidates and jeopardize our ability to commercialize our product candidates and generate revenue.

We enter into various contracts in the normal course of our business in which we indemnify the other party to the contract. In the event we have to perform under these indemnification provisions, it could materially increase our costs and potential liability.

In the normal course of business, we periodically enter into academic, commercial, service, collaboration, licensing, consulting and other agreements that contain indemnification provisions. With respect to our academic and other research agreements, we typically indemnify the institution and related parties from losses arising from claims relating to the products, processes or services made, used, sold or performed pursuant to the agreements for which we have secured licenses, and from claims arising from our or our sublicensees’ exercise of rights under the agreement. With respect to our collaboration and contract service agreements, we typically indemnify our collaborators from any third party product liability claims that could result from the production, use or consumption of the product, as well as for alleged infringements of any patent or other intellectual property right by a third party. With respect to consulting agreements, we typically indemnify consultants from claims arising from the good faith performance of their consulting services.

Should our obligation under an indemnification provision exceed applicable insurance coverage or should we be denied insurance coverage, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected. Similarly, if we are relying on a collaborator to indemnify us and the collaborator is denied insurance coverage or the indemnification obligation exceeds their applicable insurance coverage, and if the collaborator does not have other assets available to indemnify us, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

To the extent we are able to enter into collaborative arrangements or strategic alliances, we may be exposed to risks related to those collaborations and alliances.

Biotechnology companies sometimes become dependent upon collaborative arrangements or strategic alliances to complete the development and commercialization of product candidates. In seeking collaborative arrangements and strategic partners, we face significant competition from other companies as well as public and private research institutions. There can be no assurance that we will be able to enter into or maintain strategic alliances on terms favorable to us, or at all. If we elect to enter into collaborative arrangements or strategic alliances, these arrangements may place the development of our product candidates outside our control, may require us to relinquish important rights or may otherwise be on terms unfavorable to us, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Dependence on collaborative arrangements or strategic alliances would subject us to a number of risks, including the risk that:

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property Rights

If, in the United States and other countries, we are unable to adequately protect our proprietary technology or maintain issued patents which are sufficient to protect nomlabofusp or potential product candidates, third parties could compete against us more directly, which would have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

Our commercial success will depend in part on our success in obtaining and maintaining issued patents and other intellectual property rights in the United States and elsewhere and protecting our proprietary technology. If we do not adequately protect our intellectual property and proprietary technology, competitors may be able to use our

technologies and erode or negate any competitive advantage we may have, which could harm our business and ability to achieve profitability.

With respect to our patent portfolio, we in-license from WFUHS certain issued U.S. patents that relate to nomlabofusp and its use for treating FA. We also in-license from IU a United States patent and pending non-provisional applications in the United States and certain foreign countries that relate to the composition of nomlabofusp and methods of use, and certain U.S. patents relating to materials and methods of use relating to the development of nomlabofusp. We also own or co-own pending international PCT, foreign and United States non-provisional applications, a United States Patent, and United States provisional applications relating to the development of nomlabofusp, including methods of use of nomlabofusp, biomarkers and to our peptide delivery platform technology.

In some cases, we have only filed provisional patent applications on certain aspects of our technologies and each of these provisional patent applications is not eligible to become an issued patent until, among other things, we file a non-provisional patent application within 12 months of the filing date of the applicable provisional patent application. Any failure to file a non-provisional patent application within this timeline could cause us to lose the ability to obtain patent protection for the inventions disclosed in the associated provisional patent applications.

With respect to both in-licensed and owned intellectual property, we cannot predict whether the patent applications we and our licensors are currently pursuing will issue as patents in any particular jurisdiction or whether the claims of any issued patents will provide sufficient protection from competitors or other third parties.

We cannot provide any assurances that any of our pending patent applications that mature into issued patents will include claims with a scope sufficient to protect nomlabofusp, or other potential product candidates. Other parties have developed technologies that may be related or competitive to our approach and may have filed or may file patent applications and may have received or may receive patents that may overlap or conflict with our patent applications, either by claiming the same methods or formulations or by claiming subject matter that could dominate our patent position. The patent positions of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, including our patent position, involve complex legal and factual questions, and, therefore, the issuance, scope, validity and enforceability of any patent claims that we may obtain cannot be predicted with certainty. Patents, if issued, may be challenged, deemed unenforceable, invalidated, or circumvented. U.S. patents and patent applications may also be subject to interference proceedings, ex parte reexamination, or inter partes review proceedings, supplemental examination and challenges in district court. Patents may be subjected to opposition, post-grant review, or comparable proceedings lodged in various foreign, both national and regional, patent offices. These proceedings could result in either loss of the patent or denial of the patent application or loss or reduction in the scope of one or more of the claims of the patent or patent application. In addition, such proceedings may be costly. Thus, any patents that we may own or exclusively license may not provide any protection against competitors. Furthermore, an adverse decision in an interference proceeding can result in a third party receiving the patent right sought by us, which in turn could affect our ability to develop, market or otherwise commercialize nomlabofusp, and other potential product candidates.

Furthermore, though an issued patent is presumed valid and enforceable, its issuance is not conclusive as to its validity or its enforceability and it may not provide us with adequate proprietary protection or competitive advantages against competitors with similar products. Competitors may also be able to design around our patents. Other parties may develop and obtain patent protection for more effective technologies, designs or methods. The laws of some foreign countries do not protect our proprietary rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States, and we may encounter significant problems in protecting our proprietary rights in these countries. If these developments were to occur, they could have a material adverse effect on our potential future sales.

Our ability to enforce our patent rights depends on our ability to detect infringement. It is difficult to detect infringers who do not advertise the components that are used in their products. Moreover, it may be difficult or impossible to obtain evidence of infringement in a competitor’s or potential competitor’s product. Any litigation to enforce or defend our patent rights, even if we were to prevail, could be costly and time-consuming and would divert the attention of our management and key personnel from our business operations. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded if we were to prevail may not be commercially meaningful.

In addition, proceedings to enforce or defend our patents could put our patents at risk of being invalidated, held unenforceable, or interpreted narrowly. Such proceedings could also provoke third parties to assert claims against us, including that some or all of the claims in one or more of our patents are invalid or otherwise unenforceable. If any of our patents covering nomlabofusp are invalidated or found unenforceable, our financial

position and results of operations would be materially and adversely impacted. In addition, if a court found that valid, enforceable patents held by third parties covered nomlabofusp, our financial position and results of operations would also be materially and adversely impacted.

The degree of future protection for our proprietary rights is uncertain, and we cannot ensure that:

We rely upon unpatented trade secrets, unpatented know-how and continuing technological innovation to develop and maintain our competitive position, which we seek to protect, in part, by confidentiality agreements with our employees and consultants. We also have agreements with our employees and selected consultants that obligate them to assign their inventions to us and have non-compete agreements with some, but not all, of our consultants. It is possible that technology relevant to our business will be independently developed by a person that is not a party to such an agreement. Furthermore, if the employees and consultants who are parties to these agreements breach or violate the terms of these agreements, we may not have adequate remedies for any such breach or violation, and we could lose our trade secrets through such breaches or violations. Further, our trade secrets could otherwise become known or be independently discovered by our competitors. If we are unable to adequately protect our proprietary technology or maintain issued patents which are sufficient to protect nomlabofusp or potential future product candidates, third parties could compete against us more directly, which would have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

Our key patent, which we license relates to nomlabofusp will expire in 2040 and we will lose our ability to rely upon this patent to prevent competing products from entering the market, which may impair our ability to generate revenue.

We have in-licensed certain patents relating to nomlabofusp from WFUHS. The U.S. patents relating to nomlabofusp and its use for the treatment of FA expire in 2024 and 2025, respectively. When these patents expire, we will be unable to use these patents to try to block others from marketing nomlabofusp in the United States We have also in-licensed an issued United States patent and pending non-provisional patent applications in the United States and certain foreign countries relating to the composition of nomlabofusp and methods of use from IU. This United States patent will expire in 2040 at the earliest. Pending applications if issued as patents, would also expire in 2040 at the earliest. We cannot predict whether these patent applications we and our licensors are currently pursuing will issue as patents in any particular jurisdiction or whether the claims of any issued patents will provide sufficient protection from competitors or other third parties. When these various patents, if issued, expire, we will be unable to use the patents to try to block others from marketing nomlabofusp in the United States.

We own a certain United States provisional application and certain United States and foreign non-provisional applications and a United States patent relating to our platform technology. The United States Patent will expire in 2041 at the earliest, and the pending applications, if issued as patents, would be expected to expire in 2041-2044. The provisional application may not be timely converted into a non-provisional application, and we cannot predict

whether these provisional applications and non-provisional patent applications will issue as patents in any particular jurisdiction, or whether the claims of any issued patents will provide sufficient protection from competitors or third parties for potential product candidates. When these various patents expire, we will be unable to use the patents to try to block others from marketing products pertaining to our platform technology.

In addition, given the amount of time required for the development, testing, and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such product candidates might expire before or shortly after such product candidates are commercialized. As a result, our intellectual property may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.

Once our patents expire, we will be subject to competition from third parties who will be able to use the intellectual property covered by these patents, which could impair our ability to generate revenue and could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We may infringe the intellectual property rights of others, which may prevent or delay our product development efforts and stop us from commercializing or may increase the costs of commercializing nomlabofusp or other potential product candidates, if approved.

Our success will depend in part on our ability to operate without infringing the intellectual property and proprietary rights of third parties. We cannot ensure that our business, products and methods do not or will not infringe the patents or other intellectual property rights of third parties.

The pharmaceutical industry is characterized by extensive litigation regarding patents and other intellectual property rights. Third parties may allege that nomlabofusp or our other potential product candidates or the use of our technologies infringes patent claims or other intellectual property rights held by them or that we are employing their proprietary technology without authorization. Patent and other types of intellectual property litigation can involve complex factual and legal questions, and their outcome is uncertain. Any claim relating to intellectual property infringement that is successfully asserted against us may require us to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees if we are found to be willfully infringing another party’s patents, for past use of the asserted intellectual property and royalties and other consideration going forward if we are forced to take a license. In addition, we may also be required to indemnify certain of our licensors, vendors or suppliers from any damages they incur related to any infringement of any third party intellectual property by our product candidates.

In addition, if any such claim were successfully asserted against us and we could not obtain such a license, we may be forced to stop or delay developing, manufacturing, selling or otherwise commercializing nomlabofusp.

Even if we are successful in these proceedings, we may incur substantial costs and divert management time and attention in pursuing these proceedings, which could have a material adverse effect on us. If we are unable to avoid infringing the patent rights of others, we may be required to seek a license, defend an infringement action or challenge the validity of the patents in court, or redesign our products. Patent litigation is costly and time consuming. We may not have sufficient resources to bring these actions to a successful conclusion. In addition, intellectual property litigation or claims could force us to do one or more of the following:

Any of these risks coming to fruition could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

We may be subject to claims challenging the inventorship or ownership of our patents and other intellectual property.

We may also be subject to claims that former employees or other third parties have an ownership interest in our patents or other intellectual property. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship or ownership. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees.

Obtaining and maintaining our patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by governmental patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for non-compliance with these requirements.

We have systems in place to remind us to pay periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other patent and application fees, and we employ an outside law firm to pay these fees. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and various foreign governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. We employ an outside law firm and other professionals to help us comply, and in many cases, an inadvertent lapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules. However, there are situations in which noncompliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. If this occurs, our competitors may be able to enter the market, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.

We may be involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or the patents of our licensors, which could be expensive, time-consuming and unsuccessful.

Competitors may infringe on our patents or the patents of our licensors. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. In addition, in an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of our or our licensors is not valid, is unenforceable and/or is not infringed, or may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology in question. An adverse result in any litigation or defense proceedings could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Interference proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by us may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions with respect to our patents or patent applications or those of our licensors. An unfavorable outcome could require us to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights to us from the prevailing party. Our business, financial condition and results of operations could be harmed if the prevailing party does not offer us a license on commercially reasonable terms. Our defense of litigation or interference proceedings may fail and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distract our management and other employees. We may not be able to prevent, alone or with our licensors, misappropriation of our intellectual property rights, particularly in countries where the laws may not protect those rights as fully as in the United States, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments. If investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a material adverse effect on the price of our common stock.

Issued patents covering our product candidates could be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged in court.

If we or one of our licensing partners initiated legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering our product candidate, the defendant could counterclaim that the patent covering our product candidate is invalid and/or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge include alleged failures to meet any of several statutory requirements, including lack of novelty, obviousness or non-enablement. Grounds for unenforceability assertions include allegations that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant information from the U.S. PTO, or made a misleading statement, during prosecution. Third parties may also raise similar claims before administrative bodies in the United States or abroad, even outside the context of

litigation. Such mechanisms include re-examination, post grant review and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions, e.g. opposition proceedings. Such proceedings could result in revocation or amendment of our patents in such a way that they no longer cover our product candidates or competitive products. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. With respect to validity, for example, we cannot ensure that there is no invalidating prior act, of which we and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity and/or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on our product candidates. Such a loss of patent protection would have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

We do not seek to protect our intellectual property rights in all jurisdictions throughout the world and we may not be able to adequately enforce our intellectual property rights even in the jurisdictions where we seek protection.

Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on product candidates in all countries and jurisdictions 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. 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. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our products and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biopharmaceuticals, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. For example, an April 2020 report from the Office of the United States Trade Representative identified a number of countries, including India and China, where challenges to the procurement and enforcement of patent rights have been reported. Several countries, including India and China, have been listed in the report every year since 1989. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license, which would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We are dependent on licensed intellectual property for nomlabofusp. If we were to lose our rights to licensed intellectual property, we may not be able to continue developing or commercializing nomlabofusp, if approved.

We have an exclusive license with WFUHS, pursuant to which we exclusively license certain patent rights relating to the TAT-frataxin fusion protein and its use, on a worldwide basis. We have an exclusive license with IU, pursuant to which we exclusively license certain patent rights relating to nomlabofusp and its use for the treatment of mitochondrial diseases, on a worldwide basis.

Our license agreements with WFUHS and IU impose, and we expect our future license agreements will impose, various development, diligence, commercialization, and other obligations on us in order to maintain the licenses. In spite of our efforts, WFUHS, IU, or a future licensor might conclude that we have materially breached our obligations under such license agreements and seek to terminate the license agreements, thereby removing or limiting our ability to develop and commercialize products and technology covered by these license agreements. If these licenses are terminated, or if the underlying patent rights licensed thereunder fail to provide the intended exclusivity, competitors or other third parties would have the freedom to seek regulatory approval of, and to market, products identical to ours and we may be required to cease our development and commercialization of certain of our product candidates or of nomlabofusp. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects.

Moreover, disputes may arise regarding intellectual property subject to a licensing agreement, including:

The agreements under which we currently license intellectual property or technology from third parties are complex, and certain provisions in such agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations. The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology or increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. Moreover, if disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on commercially acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize nomlabofusp, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects.

Some intellectual property may have been discovered through government funded programs and thus may be subject to federal regulations such as “march-in” rights, certain reporting requirements and a preference for U.S.-based companies. Compliance with such regulations may limit our exclusive rights and limit our ability to contract with non-U.S. manufacturers.

Our in-licensed patent rights from WFUHS and IU were funded in part by the U.S. government and are therefore subject to certain federal regulations. When new technologies are developed with U.S. government funding, the U.S. government generally obtains certain rights in any resulting patents, including a non-exclusive license authorizing the U.S. government to use the invention or to have others use the invention on its behalf. The U.S. government’s rights may also permit it to disclose the funded inventions and technology to third parties and to exercise march-in rights to use or allow third parties to use the technology we have licensed that was developed using U.S. government funding. The U.S. government may exercise its march-in rights if it determines that action is necessary because we fail to achieve practical application of the government-funded technology, or because action is necessary to alleviate health or safety needs, to meet requirements of federal regulations, or to give preference to U.S. industry. In addition, our rights in such inventions may be subject to certain requirements to manufacture products embodying such inventions in the United States in certain circumstances and if this requirement is not waived. Any exercise by the U.S. government of such rights or by any third party of its reserved rights could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

We have not yet registered trademarks for a commercial trade name for nomlabofusp or other potential product candidates and failure to secure such registrations could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We have not yet registered trademarks for a commercial trade name for nomlabofusp or other potential product candidates. Any future trademark applications may be rejected during trademark registration proceedings. Although we would be given an opportunity to respond to those rejections, we may be unable to overcome such rejections. In addition, the U.S. PTO and comparable agencies in many foreign jurisdictions give third parties an opportunity to oppose pending trademark applications and to seek to cancel registered trademarks. Opposition or cancellation proceedings may be filed against our trademarks, and our trademarks may not survive such proceedings. Moreover, any name we propose to use with our product candidates in the United States must be approved by the FDA, and similarly in many foreign jurisdictions regardless of whether we have registered it, or applied to register it, as a trademark. The FDA typically conducts a review of proposed product names, including an

evaluation of potential for confusion with other product names. If the FDA or a foreign regulatory authority objects to any of our proposed proprietary product names, we may be required to expend significant additional resources in an effort to identify a suitable substitute name that would qualify under applicable trademark laws, not infringe the existing rights of third parties and be acceptable to the FDA or other regulatory authorities.

Any trademarks we have obtained or may obtain may be infringed or successfully challenged, resulting in harm to our business.

We expect to rely on trademarks as one means to distinguish any of our products that are approved for marketing from the products of our competitors. Once we select new trademarks and apply to register them, our trademark applications may not be approved. Third parties may oppose or attempt to cancel our trademark applications or trademarks, or otherwise challenge our use of the trademarks. In the event that our trademarks are successfully challenged, we could be forced to rebrand our drugs, which could result in loss of brand recognition and could require us to devote resources to advertising and marketing new brands. Our competitors may infringe our trademarks and we may not have adequate resources to enforce our trademarks.

If we do not obtain additional protection under the Hatch-Waxman Amendments and similar foreign legislation by extending the patent terms and obtaining data exclusivity for nomlabofusp, our business may be materially harmed.

Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of development and FDA marketing approval of nomlabofusp or our other potential product candidates, one or more of our U.S. patents may be eligible for limited patent term restoration under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, (the "Hatch-Waxman Amendments"). The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent restoration term of up to five years as compensation for patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. However, we may not be granted an extension because of, for example, failing to apply within applicable deadlines, failing to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise failing to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the applicable time period or the scope of patent protection afforded could be less than we request. If we are unable to obtain a patent term extension or restoration or the term of any such extension is less than we request, our competitors may obtain approval of competing products following our patent expiration, and our ability to generate revenues, business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

Our proprietary rights may not adequately protect our technologies, which may adversely affect our position in the market, business, financial condition and results of operations.

We rely on unpatented trade secrets, know-how, and technology, which are difficult to protect, especially in the pharmaceutical industry, where much of the information about a product must be made public during the regulatory approval process. We seek to protect trade secrets, in part, by entering into confidentiality agreements with employees, consultants and others. These parties may breach or terminate these agreements or may refuse to enter into such agreements with us, and we may not have adequate remedies for such breaches. Furthermore, these agreements may not provide meaningful protection for our trade secrets or other proprietary information or result in the effective assignment to us of intellectual property and may not provide an adequate remedy in the event of unauthorized use or disclosure of confidential information or other breaches of the agreements. Despite our efforts to protect our trade secrets, we or our board members, employees, consultants, contractors or scientific and other advisors may unintentionally or willfully disclose our proprietary information to competitors.

If we fail to maintain trade secret protection, our competitive position may be adversely affected. Competitors may also independently discover our trade secrets. Enforcement of claims that a third party has illegally obtained and is using trade secrets is expensive, time consuming and uncertain. If our competitors independently develop equivalent knowledge, methods and know-how, we would not be able to assert our trade secrets against them and our business, financial condition and results of operations could be harmed.

Changes in U.S. patent law could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our products.

As is the case with other biopharmaceutical companies, our success is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the biopharmaceutical industry involves both technological and legal complexity and is therefore costly, time consuming and inherently uncertain. Patent reform legislation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of patent applications and the enforcement or defense of issued patents. The Leahy Smith America Invents Act ("the Leahy Smith Act") enacted in

September 2011, brought significant changes to the U.S. patent law system. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted and may affect patent litigation. The United States Patent Office continues to develop and implement new regulations and procedures to govern administration of the Leahy Smith Act, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the Leahy Smith Act became effective on March 16, 2013. The Leahy Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could harm our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

In addition, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. Additionally, there have been recent proposals for additional changes to the patent laws of the United States and other countries that, if adopted, could impact our ability to enforce our proprietary technology. Depending on future actions by the U.S. Congress, the U.S. courts, the U.S. PTO and the relevant law-making bodies in other countries, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future.

We may be subject to damages resulting from claims that we or our employees have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged trade secrets of our employees’ former employers.

Many of our employees have been previously employed at other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Although we are not aware of any claims currently pending against us, we may be subject to claims that we or our employees inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed the trade secrets or other proprietary information of our employees’ former employers. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. Even if we are successful in defending against these claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management. If we fail in defending such claims, in addition to paying monetary claims, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel. A loss of key personnel or their work product could hamper or prevent our ability to develop and commercialize nomlabofusp or our other potential product candidates, which would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Risks Related to Our Common Stock

Our stock price could be highly volatile, and purchasers of our common stock could incur substantial losses.

The market price of our common stock could be subject to significant fluctuations. Market prices for securities of early-stage pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and other life sciences companies have historically been particularly volatile. Some of the factors that may cause the market price of our common stock to fluctuate include:

There is no guarantee that our common stock will appreciate or even maintain the price at which our holders have purchased it. Therefore, there is a risk that investors may lose all or part of their investment in our securities.

Moreover, the stock markets in general have experienced substantial volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of individual companies or the biotechnology sector. These broad market fluctuations may also adversely affect the trading price of our common stock.

In the past, following periods of volatility in the market price of a company’s securities, stockholders have often instituted class action securities litigation against those companies. Such litigation, if instituted, could result in substantial costs and diversion of management’s attention and resources, which could significantly impact our profitability and reputation. Any lawsuit to which we are a party, with or without merit, may result in an unfavorable judgment. We also may decide to settle lawsuits on unfavorable terms. Any such negative outcome could result in payments of substantial damages or fines, damage to our reputation or adverse changes to our offerings or business practices.

We must maintain effective internal controls over financial reporting, and if we are unable to do so, the accuracy and timeliness of our financial reporting may be adversely affected, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and stock price.

We must maintain effective internal control over financial reporting in order to accurately and timely report our results of operations and financial condition. In addition, as a public company, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that we assess the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures quarterly and the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting at the end of each fiscal year.

The rules governing the standards that must be met for our management to assess our internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act are complex and require significant documentation, testing and possible remediation. These stringent standards require that our audit committee be advised and regularly updated on management’s review of internal control over financial reporting.

Our management may not be able to effectively and timely implement controls and procedures which respond to the increased regulatory compliance and reporting requirements that are applicable to us as a public company. If we fail to staff our accounting, finance and information technology functions adequately or maintain internal control over financial reporting adequate to meet the demands that are placed upon us as a public company, including the requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, or to otherwise prevent material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting, our business and reputation may be harmed and our stock price may decline. Furthermore, investor perceptions of us may be adversely affected, which could cause a decline in the market price of our common stock.

Ownership of our common stock is highly concentrated, and it may prevent other stockholders from influencing significant corporate decisions.

Entities affiliated with Deerfield Management Company beneficially own or control approximately 38.6% of our outstanding common stock (assuming full exercise of our outstanding pre-funded warrants and no exercise of outstanding options) as of December 31, 2023, on a fully-diluted basis. Accordingly, such entities have substantial influence over the outcome of a corporate action by us requiring stockholder approval, including the election of directors, any merger, consolidation or sale of all or substantially all of our assets or any other significant corporate transaction. These stockholders also may exert influence in delaying or preventing a change in control of the combined company, even if such change in control would benefit our other stockholders.

We are a smaller reporting company. We cannot be certain whether the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to smaller reporting companies will make our common shares less attractive to investors or otherwise limit our ability to raise additional funds.

We are currently a “smaller reporting company” as defined in the Exchange Act of 1934 and have elected to take advantage of certain of the scaled disclosures available to smaller reporting companies, including simplified executive compensation disclosures in our filings, exemption from the provisions of Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requiring that an independent registered accounting firm provide an attestation report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and certain other decreased disclosure obligations in our SEC filings, including, among other things, only being required to provide two years of audited financial statements in annual reports. Reduced disclosure in our SEC filings due to our status as a smaller reporting company may make it harder for investors to analyze our results of operations and financial prospects. We cannot predict whether investors will find our common stock less attractive because of our reliance on any of these exemptions. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and our stock price may be more volatile.

Anti-takeover provisions in our charter documents and under Delaware law could make an acquisition of us more difficult and may prevent attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our management.

Provisions in our certificate of incorporation and bylaws may delay or prevent an acquisition or a change in management. These provisions include a classified board of directors, a prohibition on actions by written consent of our stockholders, and the ability of the board of directors to issue preferred stock without stockholder approval. In addition, because we are in Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law ("DGCL") which prohibits stockholders owning in excess of 15% of our outstanding voting stock from merging or combining with us. Although we believe these provisions collectively will provide for an opportunity to receive higher bids by requiring potential acquirers to negotiate with our board of directors, they would apply even if the offer may be considered beneficial by some stockholders. In addition, these provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove then current management by making it more difficult for stockholders to replace members of the board of directors, which is responsible for appointing the members of management.

We do not anticipate that we will pay any cash dividends in the foreseeable future.

The current expectation is that we will retain our future earnings to fund the development and growth of our business. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, of our common stock will be stockholders’ sole source of gain, if any, for the foreseeable future.

Our failure to meet the continued listing requirements of The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC could result in a delisting of our Common Stock.

If we fail to satisfy the continued listing requirements of The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC ("Nasdaq") such as the corporate governance requirements or the minimum closing bid price requirement, Nasdaq may take steps to delist our common stock. Such a delisting would likely have a negative effect on the price of our common stock and would impair a stockholders ability to sell or purchase shares of common stock when they wish to do so. In the event of a delisting, we can provide no assurance that any action taken by us to restore compliance with listing requirements would allow the common stock to become listed again, stabilize the market price or improve the liquidity of the common stock, prevent the common stock from dropping below the Nasdaq minimum bid price requirement or prevent future noncompliance with Nasdaq’s listing requirements.

General Risk Factors

Financial reporting obligations of being a public company in the United States are expensive and time-consuming, and our management will be required to devote substantial time to new compliance matters.

The obligations of being a public company in the United States require significant expenditures and place significant demands on our management and other personnel, including costs resulting from public company reporting obligations under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the rules and regulations regarding corporate governance practices, including those under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (the "Dodd-Frank Act") and the listing requirements of Nasdaq on which our securities are listed. These rules require the maintenance of effective disclosure and financial controls and procedures, internal control over financial reporting and strong corporate governance practices, among many other complex rules that are often difficult to implement, monitor and maintain compliance with. Our management and other personnel devote a substantial amount of time to ensure that we comply with all of these requirements and to keep pace with new regulations, otherwise we may fall out of compliance and risk becoming subject to litigation or being delisted, among other potential problems.

Our employees may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including violating applicable regulatory standards and requirements or engaging in insider trading, which could significantly impact our business.

We are exposed to the risk of employee fraud or other misconduct. Misconduct by employees could include intentional, reckless or negligent failures to comply with the regulations of the FDA and applicable non-U.S. regulators, provide accurate information to the FDA and applicable non-U.S. regulators, comply with healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations in the United States and abroad, report financial information or data accurately or disclose unauthorized activities to us. Employees may also unintentionally or willfully disclose our proprietary and/or confidential information to competitors. In particular, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, misconduct, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Employee misconduct could also involve the improper use of, including trading on, information obtained in the course of clinical trials, which could result in regulatory sanctions and serious harm to our reputation. We have adopted a code of conduct, but it is not always possible to identify and deter employee misconduct, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may be ineffective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with these laws or regulations. In addition, we are subject to the risk that a person or government could allege fraud or other misconduct, even if none occurred. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of significant fines or other sanctions.

Unfavorable global economic conditions could adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Our results of operations could be adversely affected by general conditions in the global economy, geopolitical events and general conditions in the global financial markets. A severe or prolonged economic downturn due to geopolitical tension resulting from ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine and the current conflict in Israel and Gaza (including any escalation or expansion) or other factors could result in a variety of risks to our business, including, weakened demand for our product candidates and our ability to raise additional capital when needed on acceptable terms, if at all. A weak or declining economy could also strain our suppliers, possibly resulting in supply disruption, or cause our customers to delay making payments for our products. Any of the foregoing could harm our business and we cannot anticipate all of the ways in which the current economic climate and financial market conditions could adversely impact our business.

Adverse developments affecting the financial services industry, including events or concerns involving liquidity, defaults or non-performance by financial institutions or transactional counterparties, could adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Events involving limited liquidity, defaults, non-performance or other adverse developments that affect financial institutions, transactional counterparties or other companies in the financial services industry or the financial services industry generally, or concerns or rumors about any events of these kinds or other similar risks, have in the past and may in the future lead to market-wide liquidity problems. For example, in early 2023, several financial institutions closed and were taken into receivership by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

(“FDIC”). Although we assess our banking and customer relationships as we believe necessary or appropriate, our access to funding sources and other credit arrangements in amounts adequate to finance or capitalize our current and projected future business operations could be significantly impaired by factors that affect us, the financial services industry or economy in general. These factors could include, among others, events such as liquidity constraints or failures, the ability to perform obligations under various types of financial, credit or liquidity agreements or arrangements, disruptions or instability in the financial services industry or financial markets, or concerns or negative expectations about the prospects for companies in the financial services industry.

In addition, investor concerns regarding the U.S. or international financial systems could result in less favorable commercial financing terms, including higher interest rates or costs and tighter financial and operating covenants, or systemic limitations on access to credit and liquidity sources, thereby making it more difficult for us to acquire financing on acceptable terms or at all. Any decline in available funding or access to our cash and liquidity resources could, among other risks, adversely impact our ability to meet our operating expenses, financial obligations or fulfill our other obligations, result in breaches of our contractual obligations or result in violations of federal or state wage and hour laws. Any of these impacts, or any other impacts resulting from the factors described above or other related or similar factors not described above, could have material adverse impacts on our liquidity and our business, financial condition or results of operations.

ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

None.

ITEM 1C. CYBERSECURITY

Cyber Risk Management and Strategy

We have implemented and maintain various information security processes designed to manage cybersecurity risks relating to our critical computer networks, third party hosted services, communications systems, hardware and software, and our critical data, including intellectual property, confidential information that is proprietary, strategic or competitive in nature, and data related to our clinical trials and products (Information Systems and Data).

Our Director of Information Technology, assisted by our managed information technology service provider and other third party service providers, lead the Company’s cybersecurity risk management processes. This group works to identify and assess risks from cybersecurity threats by monitoring and evaluating our threat environment and the Company’s risk profile using various methods in certain contexts, including, manual tools, subscribing to reports and services that identify cybersecurity threats, analyzing threat intelligence reports and feeds, conducting scans of certain environments, and other tests.

We implement and maintain various technical, physical, and organizational measures, processes, standards and policies designed to manage risks from cybersecurity threats to our Information Systems and Data, as applicable depending on the environment, including incident detection and response, disaster recovery/business continuity policies, network security controls and data segmentation, access controls, physical security, asset management and tracking, systems monitoring, and employee training.

Our assessment and management of risks from cybersecurity threats are part of the Company’s overall risk management processes. Our Director of Information Technology works with management to prioritize our risk management processes and mitigate cybersecurity threats that are more likely to lead to a material impact to our business.

We use third-party service providers to assist us to identify, assess, and manage risks from cybersecurity threats. These third-party service providers may include threat intelligence service providers, cybersecurity consultants, cybersecurity software providers, managed cybersecurity service providers, and dark web monitoring services.

We also have established a process to conduct diligence on certain third parties before engaging with those third parties, such as those that support our GxP processes, which may include a security assessment.

We have not identified any cybersecurity incidents or threats that have materially affected us or are reasonably likely to materially affect us, including our business strategy, results of operations or financial condition; however, like other companies in our industry, we and our third-party vendors may, from time to time, experience threats and security incidents relating to our and our third-party vendors’ information systems and infrastructure. For more information, please see our risk factors under Part 1 Item 1A. Risk Factors.

Governance

Our board of directors holds oversight responsibility over the Company’s cybersecurity risk management as part of its general oversight function. The audit committee of the board of directors is responsible for overseeing the Company’s cybersecurity risk management processes, including oversight of the Company’s processes for monitoring and controlling cybersecurity risks.

Our cybersecurity risk assessment and management processes are implemented and maintained by certain Company management, including our Director of Information Technology, who has over 10 years of information technology management experience.

The Director of Information Technology, along with management, is responsible for helping to integrate cybersecurity risk considerations into the Company’s overall risk management strategy and communicating key priorities to relevant personnel. Management is responsible for approving budgets, helping prepare for cybersecurity incidents, approving cybersecurity processes, and reviewing security-related reports.

We have processes designed to escalate certain cybersecurity incidents to members of management depending on the circumstances, including our Vice President Legal and Compliance, Vice President Finance and

Administration, Chief Financial Officer and Director of Information Technology. In addition, the Company’s incident response policy includes a process for reporting to the audit committee of the board of directors for certain cybersecurity incidents.

The audit committee receives reports from members of the Company’s management concerning the Company’s significant cybersecurity threats and risk and the processes the Company has implemented to address them, as applicable.

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

We currently lease 1,750 square feet of laboratory space in Philadelphia, PA. We are currently on a month-to-month lease on this Philadelphia lab space. We, as well as our landlord, can terminate the lease with four months notice.

We have entered into a lease for 3,927 square feet of new laboratory space in King of Prussia, PA to replace the Philadelphia lab space, but this lease has not yet commenced with expected occupancy in the second quarter of 2024.

We are party to an operating lease for approximately 17,705 square feet of office space in Boston, Massachusetts, which we refer to as the Boston Lease. The Boston Lease expires in October 2029. On October 27, 2020, we entered into a sublease agreement whereby we subleased all 17,705 square feet of office space leased under the Boston Lease until October 2029.

We believe that we will need to increase our lease space in the near and intermediate term. We believe that both appropriate office and laboratory space will be readily available on commercially reasonable terms.

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

We may be subject to other legal proceedings and claims in the ordinary course of business. We cannot predict the results of any such disputes, and despite the potential outcomes, the existence thereof may have an adverse material impact on us due to diversion of management time and attention as well as the financial costs related to resolving such disputes.

ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

Not applicable.

PART II

ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES.

Market Information

Our common stock is publicly traded on the Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol “LRMR.”

Holders

As of March 14, 2024, we had approximately 62 record holders of our common stock.

Dividends

We have not declared or paid any dividends since our inception nor do we expect to pay dividends in the foreseeable future.

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

There have been no sales of unregistered securities other than as previously disclosed by us in our Current Reports on Form 8-K as filed with the SEC.

Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

None.

ITEM 6. [Reserved.]

ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

You should read the following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations together with the audited consolidated financial statements and the related notes included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. In addition to historical financial information, the following discussion contains forward-looking statements based upon our current plans, expectations and beliefs that involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Our actual results may differ materially from those described in or implied by these forward-looking statements as a result of many factors, including those set forth under the section titled “Risk Factors” and in other parts of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Overview

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company focused on developing treatments for patients suffering from complex rare diseases using our novel cell penetrating peptide ("CPP") technology platform. Our lead product candidate, nomlabofusp (nomlabofusp is the International Nonproprietary Name ( "INN") and the United States Adopted Name ("USAN") for CTI-1601), is a subcutaneously administered, recombinant fusion protein intended to deliver tissue frataxin ("FXN"), an essential protein, to the mitochondria of patients with Friedreich's ataxia (“FA”). FA is a rare, progressive, and fatal disease in which patients are unable to produce sufficient FXN due to a genetic abnormality. Currently, there are no treatment options that address the core deficit of FA, low levels of FXN. Nomlabofusp represents the first potential therapy designed to increase FXN levels in patients with FA.

We believe that our CPP platform, which enables a therapeutic molecule to cross a cell membrane in order to reach intracellular targets, has the potential to enable the treatment of other rare and orphan diseases. We intend to use our proprietary platform to target additional orphan indications characterized by deficiencies in or alterations of intracellular content or activity.

Since our inception, we have devoted substantially all of our resources to developing nomlabofusp, building our intellectual property portfolio, developing third-party manufacturing capabilities, business planning, raising capital, and providing general and administrative support for such operations.

Nomlabofusp Program Update

Clinical Trials

We have completed two Phase 1 clinical trials and a Phase 2 dose exploration trial in patients with FA.

In May 2021, we reported positive top-line data from our Phase 1 FA program after completing dosing of the single ascending dose ("SAD") trial in December 2020 and of the multiple ascending dose ("MAD") trial in March 2021. Data from these trials demonstrated proof-of-concept by showing that daily subcutaneous injections of nomlabofusp for up to 13 days resulted in dose-dependent increases in FXN levels from baseline compared to placebo in all evaluated tissues (buccal cells, skin, and platelets). There were no serious adverse events associated with either the MAD or SAD trials.

In May 2023, we reported preliminary unblinded top-line data from the 25 mg cohort of our Phase 2 four-week, placebo-controlled, dose exploration trial of nomlabofusp in FA patients. Data from the cohort indicated nomlabofusp was generally well tolerated and showed increases in FXN levels from baseline compared to placebo in all evaluated tissues (skin and buccal cells) at day 14.

In June 2023, we met with the FDA. Following that meeting, we submitted a complete response to the FDA’s partial clinical hold that included unblinded safety, PK and frataxin data from the Phase 2 trial’s completed 25 mg cohort.

In July 2023, following the FDA’s review of our complete response to the partial clinical hold, the FDA cleared initiation of a second cohort (50 mg) of our four-week, placebo-controlled, Phase 2 dose exploration trial and to initiate our OLE trial with daily dosing of 25 mg.

In January 2024, we initiated the OLE trial evaluating daily subcutaneous injections of 25 mg of nomlabofusp self-administered or administered by a caregiver, with the first patient dosed in March 2024. Participants who complete treatment in the Phase 2 dose exploration trial, or who previously completed a prior clinical trial of nomlabofusp are potentially eligible to screen for the OLE. The OLE will evaluate the safety and tolerability and PK and measures of frataxin levels in peripheral tissues as well as other exploratory PD (lipid profiles and gene expression data) following long-term subcutaneous administration of nomlabofusp. Clinical measures collected during the trial will be compared to data from a synthetic control arm derived from participants in the Friedreich’s Ataxia Clinical Outcome Measures Study ("FACOMS") database. Dose escalation in the OLE trial will be

considered based on safety, tolerability, PK, and tissue FXN levels from the Phase 2 trial’s 50 mg cohort as well as available data from the 25 mg dose of nomlabofusp in the OLE trial and is contingent on FDA review as part of the partial clinical hold. Initial data from the OLE trial is expected in the fourth quarter of 2024.

In February 2024, we reported positive top-line data and successful completion of the two cohorts (25 mg and 50 mg groups) of our four-week, placebo-controlled Phase 2 dose exploration study of nomlabofusp in participants with FA. Nomlabofusp was generally well tolerated and demonstrated dose dependent increases in FXN levels in all evaluated tissues (skin and buccal cells) after daily dosing of 14 days followed by every other day dosing until day 28 in the 25 mg and 50 mg cohorts. Participants in the 25 mg (n=13) and 50 mg (n=15) cohorts were randomized 2:1 to receive subcutaneous injections of nomlabofusp or placebo.

Recently, we had discussions with the FDA regarding the use of tissue FXN levels as a novel surrogate endpoint. The FDA has acknowledged that frataxin deficiency appears to be critical to the pathogenic mechanism of FA, and that there continues to be an unmet need for treatments for FA patients that address the underlying disease pathophysiology. We intend to pursue an accelerated approval using FXN levels, supportive PD and clinical information, and safety data from the OLE study, along with additional non-clinical pharmacology information needed to support the novel surrogate endpoint approach. We are beginning to plan for a confirmatory study and are targeting a BLA submission in the second half of 2025.

Nomlabofusp has been granted Orphan Drug (U.S. and Europe), Rare Pediatric Disease (U.S.), Fast Track (U.S.), and PRIME (Europe) designations for FA. We have also begun to engage with regulators and investigators outside the U.S. as we prepare to expand our clinical program to additional geographies. With approximately 75% of individuals with FA living outside the U.S., establishing global clinical trial capabilities is important for addressing the pressing unmet needs of the FA community.

Financing Activities, Including Recent Material Financings

We have funded our operations to date primarily with proceeds from sales of common stock, proceeds from the sale of prefunded warrants for the purchase of common stock, the acquisition in 2020 of cash, cash equivalents, marketable securities and restricted cash upon the merger with Zafgen, Inc. ("Zafgen") and, prior to the 2020 merger with Zafgen, capital contributions from Chondrial Holdings, LLC.

In September 2022, we sold 25,558,750 shares of common stock in an underwritten offering for net proceeds of $75.2 million, after issuance costs.

In February 2024, we sold 19,736,842 shares of common stock in an underwritten public offering, for net proceeds of approximately $161.6 million.

Critical Accounting Policies and Significant Judgments and Estimates

Our consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with GAAP. The preparation of our consolidated financial statements and related disclosures requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amount of assets, liabilities, costs and expenses, and related disclosures. We believe that the estimates and assumptions involved in the accounting policies described below may have the greatest potential impact on our consolidated financial statements and, therefore, consider these to be our critical accounting policies. We evaluate these estimates and assumptions on an ongoing basis. Our actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions and conditions.

Research and Development Expense

Costs for certain research and development activities, such as manufacturing, non-clinical studies and clinical trials are generally recognized based on the evaluation of the progress of completion of specific tasks using information and data provided by our vendors and collaborators, and accordingly, are considered an area of significant judgment and management’s review of manufacturing, non-clinical and clinical expenses. This process involves reviewing open contracts and purchase orders, communicating with our personnel and outside vendors to identify services that have been performed on our behalf and estimating the level of service performed and the associated costs incurred for the services when we have not yet been invoiced or otherwise notified of the actual costs. We work with vendors and suppliers to ensure that our estimates of our research and development expenses are reasonable. We expect to increase our investment in research and development in order to advance nomlabofusp through additional clinical trials. As a result, we expect that our research and development expenses will increase in the foreseeable future as we pursue clinical development of nomlabofusp and/or any other product candidates we develop.

Stock Compensation Expense

We measure all stock-based awards granted to employees and directors based on the fair value on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The Black-Scholes option-pricing model requires the use of highly subjective assumptions which determine the fair value of stock-based awards. The assumptions used in our option-pricing model represent management’s best estimates. These estimates are complex, involve a number of variables, uncertainties and assumptions and the application of management’s judgment, and thus are inherently subjective. If factors change and different assumptions are used, our stock-based compensation expense could be materially different in the future.

Prior to May 28, 2020, we were a private company and lacked company-specific historical and implied volatility information for our common stock. Prior to January 1, 2023, the Company estimated its expected common stock price volatility solely based on the historical volatility of publicly traded peer companies with comparable characteristics including enterprise value, risk profiles and position within the industry. Beginning on January 1, 2023, the Company began blending its historical data starting in June 2020 (following its merger with Zafgen in 2020) with its historical peer group. We regularly evaluate our peer group to assess changes in circumstances where identified companies may no longer be similar to us, in which case, more suitable companies whose share prices are publicly available would be utilized in the calculation. We expect to continue to do so until we have full historical data regarding the volatility of our own traded stock price.

The expected term of our stock options has been determined utilizing the “simplified” method for awards that qualify as “plain-vanilla” options. The risk-free interest rate is determined by reference to the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant of the award for time periods approximately equal to the expected term of the award. The expected dividend yield considers the fact that we have never paid cash dividends on common stock and do not expect to pay any cash dividends in the foreseeable future.

Compensation expense of those awards is recognized over the requisite service period, which is generally the vesting period of the respective award. Typically, we issue awards with only service-based vesting conditions and record the expense for these awards using the straight-line method. We account for forfeitures as they occur.

We classify stock-based compensation expense in our consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss in the same manner in which the award recipient’s payroll costs are classified or in which the award recipient’s service payments are classified.

Financial Operations Overview

Revenue

To date, we have not generated any revenue from product sales, and do not expect to generate any revenue from the sale of products in the foreseeable future. If our development efforts result in clinical success and regulatory approval or collaboration agreements with third parties for our product candidates, we may generate revenue from those product candidates or collaborations.

Operating Expenses

The majority of our operating expenses since inception have consisted primarily of research and development activities, and general and administrative costs.

Research and Development Expenses

Research and development expenses, which consist primarily of costs associated with our product research and development efforts, are expensed as incurred. Research and development expenses consist primarily of:

At this time, we cannot reasonably estimate or know the nature, timing and estimated costs of the efforts that will be necessary to complete the clinical and commercial development of nomlabofusp, or any other product candidates we develop. We are also unable to predict when, if ever, material net cash inflows will commence from sales of our product candidates. The duration, costs, and timing of clinical trials and development of nomlabofusp or any other product candidates we develop will depend on a variety of factors, including:

A change in the outcome of one or more of these variables with respect to the development of a product candidate could significantly change the costs, timing and viability associated with the development of that product candidate. For example, if the FDA or another regulatory authority were to require us to conduct additional non-clinical or clinical trials beyond those that we currently anticipate will be required for the completion of clinical development of a product candidate, or if we experience significant delays in enrollment in any of our clinical trials, we could be required to expend significant additional financial resources and time on the completion of clinical development.

General and Administrative Expenses

General and administrative expenses consist primarily of personnel costs, consisting of salaries, related benefits and stock-based compensation, costs related to our executive, finance, information technology, and costs related to other administrative functions. General and administrative expenses also include insurance expenses and professional fees for auditing, tax, and legal services, including legal expenses to pursue patent protection for our intellectual property. We expect that our general and administrative expenses will increase in the foreseeable future as we hire additional employees to implement, improve and scale our operational, financial, commercial and management systems.

Results of Operations

The following commentary is a discussion and analysis of our financial condition as of December 31, 2023 and results of operations and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2023 compared to the year ended December 31, 2022 and should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes.

The discussion and analysis of our financial condition as of December 31, 2022, and results of operations and cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2022, compared to the year ended December 31, 2021, is included in item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial and Results of Operations of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2022.

Comparison of the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022

The following table summarizes our results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022:

Research and development expenses

Research and development expenses for the twelve months ended December 31, 2023 increased $3.4 million compared to the twelve months ended December 31, 2022 due to continued and increased clinical development of nomlabofusp and related regulatory and bioanalysis. The increase in research and development expenses compared to the prior year period was primarily driven by an increase of $1.9 million in personnel expense, an increase of $1.3 million in clinical expense, an increase of $1.1 million in regulatory and statistical consulting expenditures, an increase of $0.5 million in assay development costs, and an increase of $0.3 million in stock-based compensation expense associated with stock option grants made in 2022 and 2023, partially offset by a decrease of $2.0 million in drug manufacturing costs.

General and administrative expenses

General and administrative expenses for the twelve months ended December 31, 2023 increased $1.8 million compared to the twelve months ended December 31, 2022. The increase in general and administrative expense was primarily driven by an increase of $0.7 million in stock-based compensation expense associated with stock option grants made in 2022 and 2023, an increase of $0.5 million in personnel expense, an increase of $0.5 million in operational costs primarily related to technology and an increase of $0.4 million in professional fees primarily related to legal, accounting and consulting services, partially offset by a decrease of $0.3 million in insurance expense.

Other income (expense), net

Other income (expense), net was $4.8 million of income in the twelve months ended December 31, 2023 compared to $1.2 million in the twelve months ended December 31, 2022. The increase primarily relates to interest income on a higher investment base and higher investment yields on that base during the current period.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Since our inception, we have not generated any revenue from any sources, including from product sales, and have incurred significant operating losses and negative cash flows from our operations. We have devoted substantially all of our resources to developing nomlabofusp, building our intellectual property portfolio, developing third-party manufacturing capabilities, business planning, capital raising, and providing general and administrative support for such operations.

The following table summarizes our sources and uses of cash for each of the periods presented below:

Net cash used in operating activities

During the year ended December 31, 2023, net operating activities used $33.5 million of cash, resulting from our net loss of $36.9 million, adjusted for noncash expenses of $6.0 million, and changes in our operating assets and liabilities of resulting in a use of cash of $2.5 million. Our net loss was attributed to operating expenses of $41.8 million offset by other income (net) of $4.8 million. The change in operating assets and liabilities was primarily due to a decrease in accounts payable and accrued expenses and an increase in prepaid assets.

During the year ended December 31, 2022, operating activities used $27.6 million of cash, resulting from our net loss of $35.4 million, adjusted for noncash expenses of $6.1 million, and changes in our operating assets and liabilities resulting in a use of cash of $1.7 million. Our loss was primarily attributed to operating expenses of $36.5 million. The change in operating assets and liabilities was primarily due to an increase in accrued expenses due to the growth in our operating activities following the partial release of the clinical hold in late 2022.

Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities

During the year ended December 31, 2023, investing activities provided $33.4 million of net cash, resulting from $134.8 million of maturities and sales of marketable securities, which was offset by purchases of $101.2 million in marketable securities.

During the year ended December 31, 2022, investing activities used $91.0 million of net cash, resulting from purchases of $133.6 million in marketable securities, which was offset by $42.8 million of maturities and sales of marketable securities.

Net cash provided by financing activities

During the year ended December 31, 2023, financing activities provided less than $0.1 million of cash from the exercise of stock options and warrants.

During the year ended December 31, 2022, financing activities provided $75.3 million of cash from sale of common stock in an underwritten public offering, net of issuance costs.

Operating Capital Requirements

We have not yet commercialized any products and do not expect to generate revenue from the commercial sale of any products for several years, if at all.

We have to date incurred net losses. We incurred net losses of approximately $36.9 million and $35.4 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, respectively. As of December 31, 2023, we had an accumulated deficit of $188.6 million and a cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities balance of $86.8 million, excluding restricted cash of $1.3 million.

Losses have resulted principally from costs incurred in connection with research and development activities, and general and administrative costs associated with the development of nomlabofusp and our operations. We expect to incur significant expenses and operating losses for the foreseeable future as we expect to continue to incur expenses in connection with our ongoing activities, if and as we:

In February 2024, we sold 19,736,842 shares of common stock in an underwritten public offering, net of underwriting discounts and commissions and offering costs of approximately $161.6 million. We anticipate that

these net proceeds, together with our current cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities will fund operations into 2026. If we encounter unexpected delays in our clinical trials or if there are other unanticipated changes to our operating plan from our current assumptions that negatively impact our operations, we may reduce expenditures in order to further extend our existing cash resources. Until we can generate substantial revenue, if ever, we expect to seek additional funding through a combination of public or private equity offerings, debt/royalty financings, collaborations, strategic alliances and licensing arrangements or other sources. The incurrence of indebtedness would result in increased fixed payment obligations and we may be required to agree to certain restrictive covenants, such as limitations on our ability to incur additional debt, minimum cash balances, limitations on our ability to acquire, sell or license intellectual property rights and other operating restrictions that could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business. Any additional fundraising efforts may divert our management from their day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates.

There can be no assurance that we will be able to raise sufficient additional capital on acceptable terms, if at all. If such additional financing is not available on satisfactory terms, or is not available in sufficient amounts, or we do not have sufficient authorized shares, we may be required to delay, limit, or eliminate the development of business opportunities and our ability to achieve our business objectives, our competitiveness, and our business, financial condition, and results of operations will be materially adversely affected. We could also be required to seek funds through arrangements with collaborative partners, strategic alliances or otherwise at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable and we may be required to relinquish rights to some of our technologies or product candidates or otherwise agree to terms unfavorable to us, any of which may have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and prospects. In addition, geopolitical tensions, volatility of capital markets, and other adverse macroeconomic events, including those due to inflationary pressures, rising interest rates, bank instability and the ability of the U.S. government to manage federal debt limits, as well as the potential impact of health crises on the global financial markets may reduce our ability to access capital, which could negatively affect our liquidity and ability to continue as a going concern.

If we are unable to obtain sufficient funding when needed and/or on acceptable terms, we may be required to significantly curtail, delay or discontinue one or more of our research and development programs, the manufacture of clinical and commercial supplies, product portfolio expansion and/or pre commercialization efforts, which could adversely affect our business prospects, or we may be unable to continue operations. Certain restrictive covenants, such as limitations on our ability to incur additional debt, limitations on our ability to acquire, sell or license intellectual property rights and other operating restrictions that could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business. Any additional fundraising efforts may divert our management from their day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates.

Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements

Please read Note 2 to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part IV, Item 15, of this Annual Report for a description of recent accounting pronouncements applicable to our business.

Other Company Information

None.

ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

We are a smaller reporting company as defined by Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act and are not
required to provide the information required under this item.

ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

Our audited consolidated financial statements and the report of our independent registered public accounting firm are included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K on the pages indicated in Part IV, Item 15.

ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

None.

ITEM 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

We maintain “disclosure controls and procedures,” as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act, that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in SEC rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive and our principal financial officers, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

With respect to the year ended December 31, 2023, under the supervision and with the participation of our management, we conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operations of our disclosure controls and procedures. Based upon this evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of December 31, 2023 to provide reasonable assurance that the information required to be disclosed by us in this Annual Report was (a) reported within the time periods specified by SEC rules and regulations and (b) communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, to allow timely decisions regarding any required disclosure.

Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act. Our internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. Under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, we conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting based on the framework in Internal Control – Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on our evaluation under that framework, our management concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2023.

Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting identified in connection with the evaluation required by Rule 13a-15(d) and 15d-15(d) of the Exchange Act that occurred during the quarter ended December 31, 2023, that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

ITEM 9B. OTHER INFORMATION

(a) None.

(b) During the fourth quarter of the fiscal year ended December 31, 2023, no director or “officer” as defined in Rule 16a-1(f) under the Exchange Act adopted or terminated any Rule 10b5-1 trading plan or arrangements or any non-Rule 10b5-1 trading plan or arrangements, in both cases as defined in Item 408(a) of Regulation S-K.

ITEM 9C. DISCLOSURE REGARDING FOREIGN JURISDICTIONS THAT PREVENT INSPECTIONS

Not applicable

PART III

ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

The information required by Item 10 of Form 10-K is incorporated by reference to the information contained in our definitive proxy statement for the 2024 annual meeting of stockholders.

ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

The information required by Item 11 of Form 10-K is incorporated by reference to the information contained in our definitive proxy statement for the 2024 annual meeting of stockholders.

ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

The information required by Item 12 of Form 10-K is incorporated by reference to the information contained in our definitive proxy statement for the 2024 annual meeting of stockholders.

ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE

The information required by Item 13 of Form 10-K is incorporated by reference to the information contained in our definitive proxy statement for the 2024 annual meeting of stockholders.

ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES

Our independent accounting firm is PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, PCAOB Auditor ID: 238.

The information required by Item 14 of Form 10-K is incorporated by reference to the information contained in our definitive proxy statement for the 2024 annual meeting of stockholders.

PART IV

ITEM 15. EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES

1. Financial Statements

See Index to the Consolidated Financial Statements on page F-1 of this Annual Report.

2. Financial Statement Schedules

None, as all information required in these schedules is included in the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

3. Exhibits

Reference is made to the Exhibit Index below for a list of exhibits required by Item 601 of Regulation S-K to be filed as part of this Annual Report.

The following exhibits are being filed herewith:

EXHIBIT INDEX

* Filed Herewith

+ Certain confidential portions (indicated by brackets and asterisks) have been omitted from this exhibit

** Furnished herewith. This certification will not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, except to the extent specifically incorporated by reference into such filing.

ITEM 16. Form 10-K Summary

None.

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

INDEX

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of Larimar Therapeutics, Inc.

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Larimar Therapeutics, Inc. and its subsidiary (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, and the related consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss, of changes in stockholders' equity and of cash flows for the years then ended, including the related notes (collectively referred to as the “consolidated financial statements”). In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2023 and 2022, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the years then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Basis for Opinion

These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company's consolidated financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits of these consolidated financial statements in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial reporting but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company's internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the consolidated financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the consolidated financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the consolidated financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Critical Audit Matters

The critical audit matter communicated below is a matter arising from the current period audit of the consolidated financial statements that was communicated or required to be communicated to the audit committee and that (i) relates to accounts or disclosures that are material to the consolidated financial statements and (ii) involved our especially challenging, subjective, or complex judgments. The communication of critical audit matters does not alter in any way our opinion on the consolidated financial statements, taken as a whole, and we are not, by communicating the critical audit matter below, providing a separate opinion on the critical audit matter or on the accounts or disclosures to which it relates.

Accrued Research and Development Expenses

As described in Notes 2 and 6 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company recognizes external research and development costs based on an evaluation of the progress to completion of specific tasks using information provided to the Company by its key service providers. Within accrued expenses, total accrued research and development expenses amounted to $4.6 million as of December 31, 2023. Management’s process involves reviewing open contracts and purchase orders, communicating with personnel and outside vendors to identify services that have been performed, and estimating the level of service performed and the associated costs incurred for the services when invoices or other notification of actual costs have not been received.

The principal considerations for our determination that performing procedures relating to accrued research and development expenses is a critical audit matter are (i) the significant judgment by management in developing the estimates of accrued research and development expenses and (ii) a high degree of auditor judgment, subjectivity and effort in performing procedures and evaluating audit evidence for these accrued research and development expenses

related to management’s estimates of the level of service performed and the associated costs incurred for the services when invoices or other notification of actual costs have not yet been received.

Addressing the matter involved performing procedures and evaluating audit evidence in connection with forming our overall opinion on the financial statements. These procedures also included, among others; (i) testing management’s process for estimating accrued research and development expenses; (ii) evaluating the appropriateness of the method used by management to develop the estimate; (iii) testing the completeness and accuracy of the data used by management to develop the estimates related to the level of service performed and the associated costs incurred for the services when invoices or other notification of actual costs have not yet been received; (iv) evaluating the reasonableness of the estimated costs incurred for the services which have not been invoiced or other notification of actual costs have not yet been received, on a sample basis, by tracing to underlying supporting documentation, such as underlying contracts, invoices and information received from certain third party service vendors, where applicable, and; (v) testing a selection of invoices received by the Company subsequent to December 31, 2023.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

March 14, 2024

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2020.

LARIMAR THERAPEUTICS, INC.

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(In thousands, except share and per share data)