Prothena (PRTA) 10-Q2024 Q1 Quarterly report

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

 

______________________________________ 

FORM 10-Q

 _____________________________________

(Mark One)

______________________________________ 

PROTHENA CORPORATION PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY

______________________________________ 

 

 ______________________________________

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

Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

In addition to historical information, this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Forward-looking statements may include words such as “aim,” “anticipate,” “assume,” “believe,” “contemplate,” “continue,” “could,” “due,” “estimate,” “expect,” “goal,” “intend,” “may,” “objective” “plan,” “predict,” “potential,” “positioned,” “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, any statements that refer to expectations, projections, or other characterizations of future events or circumstances are forward-looking statements.

These forward-looking statements, which reflect our beliefs, assumptions, expectations, estimates, forecasts, and projections about our business and the industry in which we operated as of the date hereof, are estimates based on our best judgment. These statements relate to, among other things, our goal to continue building a biology-directed discovery engine targeting protein dysregulation; the treatment potential, designs, proposed mechanisms of action, and potential administration of our drug candidates; potential indications and attributes of epitopes and antibodies we have identified in our programs; plans for ongoing and future clinical trials of our drug candidates; our potential to advance, initiate, and complete investigational new drug (“IND”) enabling studies for our discovery and preclinical programs; the expected timing of reporting data from clinical trials of our drug candidates, including any topline study results for our Phase 3 AFFIRM-AL clinical trial between 4Q 2024 and 2Q 2025; our collaborations with F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd and Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. (together “Roche”), Bristol Myers Squibb Company (“BMS”), and Novo Nordisk, and amounts we may receive under such collaborations; the sufficiency of our cash position to fund advancement of a broad pipeline and completion of our ongoing clinical trials; and our anticipated need for additional capital.

These forward-looking statements 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. As a result, any or all of our forward-looking statements in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q may turn out to be inaccurate. Factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially include, but are not limited to, the risks and uncertainties set forth below, those discussed under Part II Item 1A “Risk Factors” of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, and in our other filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Summary of Risks Affecting Our Business

ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets (unaudited)

See accompanying Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

See accompanying Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

See accompanying Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

As of March 31, 2024, the Company had an accumulated deficit of $1.1 billion and cash and cash equivalents of $546.5 million.

Based on the Company's business plans, management believes that the Company’s cash and cash equivalents at March 31, 2024, are sufficient to meet its obligations for at least the next twelve months. To operate beyond such period, or if the Company elects to increase its spending on research and development programs significantly above current long-term plans or enters into potential licenses and or other acquisitions of complementary technologies, products or companies, the Company may need additional capital. The Company expects to continue to finance future cash needs that exceed its cash from operating activities primarily through its current cash and cash equivalents, payments pursuant to its agreements with Roche, BMS, and Novo Nordisk, and, to the extent necessary, through proceeds from public or private equity or debt financings, loans and other collaborative agreements with corporate partners or other arrangements.

Basis of Preparation and Presentation of Financial Information

Unaudited Interim Financial Information

the periods presented. The year-end condensed consolidated balance sheet data was derived from audited financial statements, however certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP have been condensed or omitted. The condensed consolidated results of operations for any interim period are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the full year or for any other future year or interim period.

Use of Estimates

Significant Accounting Policies

Concentration of Risks and Other Risks and Uncertainties

Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to concentration of credit risk consist of cash and cash equivalents and accounts receivable. The Company places its cash equivalents with high credit quality financial institutions and, by policy, limits the amount of credit exposure with any one financial institution. Deposits held with banks have exceeded, and will continue to exceed, federally insured limits. The Company is exposed to credit risk in the event of a default by the financial institutions holding its cash and cash equivalents. The Company has not experienced any losses on its deposits of cash and cash equivalents and its credit risk exposure is up to the extent recorded on the Company's Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.

The Company operates in one segment. The Company’s chief operating decision maker (the “CODM”), its Chief Executive Officer, manages the Company’s operations and evaluates the Company’s financial performance on a consolidated basis for purposes of allocating resources.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

6. Commitments and Contingencies

In June 2021, the Company entered into a lease agreement for office space in Dublin, Ireland, which commenced in August 2021 and had an initial term of one year. In April 2023, the Company renewed the lease for another one year term with a termination date of July 2024. In addition, the Company entered into a lease agreement for additional office space in Dublin, Ireland, which commenced in August 2023 and has an initial term of one year. Both of these leases have an automatic renewal clause, pursuant to which the agreement will be extended automatically for successive periods equal to the current term, unless the agreement is cancelled by the Company.

which expires on September 30, 2028, unless terminated earlier. The Brisbane Sublease further provides that the Company is obligated to pay to the Sublandlord certain costs, including taxes and operating expenses. The Company has the option to extend the sublease by providing written notice at least nine months prior to the expiration of the sublease term. As of March 31, 2024, the Brisbane Sublease has a remaining lease term of 4.50 years.

suppliers for $11.4 million of which $6.7 million is included in current liabilities, and contractual obligations under license agreements of $0.3 million of which nil is included in current liabilities. The following is a summary of the Company's non-cancelable purchase commitments and contractual obligations as of March 31, 2024 (in thousands):

Roche License Agreement

For prasinezumab, Roche is obligated to pay:

The Company initiated a Phase 1 clinical trial for prasinezumab in 2014. Following the Phase 1 clinical trial, Roche became primarily responsible for developing, obtaining and maintaining regulatory approval for and commercializing Licensed Products. Roche also became responsible for the clinical and commercial manufacture and supply of Licensed Products.

In addition, the Company has an option under the License Agreement to co-promote prasinezumab in the U.S. in the Parkinson’s disease indication. If the Company exercises such option, it may also elect to co-promote additional Licensed

Products in the U.S. approved for Parkinson’s disease. Outside the U.S., Roche will have responsibility for developing and commercializing the Licensed Products. Roche bears all costs that are specifically related to obtaining or maintaining regulatory approval outside the U.S. and will pay the Company a variable royalty based on annual net sales of the Licensed Products outside the U.S.

Performance Obligations

The Company excludes the milestone payments and royalties in the initial transaction price calculation because such payments are considered to be variable considerations with constraint. Such milestone payments and royalties will be recognized as revenue once the Company can conclude it is probable that a significant revenue reversal will not occur in future periods.

The clinical and regulatory milestones under the License Agreement after the point at which the Company could opt out are considered to be variable considerations with constraint due to the fact that active participation in the development activities that generate the milestones is not required under the License Agreement, and the Company can opt out of these activities. There are no refunds or claw-back provisions and the milestones are uncertain of occurrence even after the Company has opted out. Based on this determination, these milestones will be recognized when the Company can conclude it is probable that a significant revenue reversal will not occur in future periods.

Overview

On March 20, 2018, the Company, through its wholly owned subsidiary Prothena Biosciences Limited (“PBL”), entered into a Master Collaboration Agreement (the “Collaboration Agreement”) with Celgene Switzerland LLC (“Celgene”), a subsidiary of Celgene Corporation (which was acquired by Bristol Myers Squibb (“BMS”) in November 2019), pursuant to which Prothena granted to Celgene a right to elect in its sole discretion to exclusively license rights both in the U.S. (the “US

As discussed below, BMS exercised its US Rights for the tau/BMS-986446 (formerly PRX005) Collaboration Target and on July 30, 2021, PBL entered into a U.S. License Agreement granting BMS the exclusive license to develop, manufacture and commercialize antibody products in the United States targeting tau (the “Tau US License Agreement”). Subsequently, BMS exercised its Global Rights for the tau/BMS-986446 Collaboration Target and on July 5, 2023, PBL entered into a Global License Agreement granting BMS the exclusive license to develop, manufacture and commercialize tau Collaboration Products globally for any and all uses or purposes with respect to any human or animal disease, disorder or condition (the “Tau Global License Agreement”). The Tau Global License Agreement supersedes and replaces the Tau US License Agreement in its entirety.

The Collaboration Agreement provided for Celgene making an upfront payment to the Company of $100.0 million which was received in April 2018, plus future potential license exercise payments and regulatory and commercial milestones for each program under the Collaboration Agreement, as well as royalties on net sales of any resulting marketed products. In connection with the Collaboration Agreement, the Company and Celgene entered into a Share Subscription Agreement on March 20, 2018, under which Celgene subscribed to 1,174,536 of the Company’s ordinary shares for a price of $42.57 per share, for a total of approximately $50.0 million.

On a program-by-program basis, following completion of a Phase 1 clinical trial for a collaboration program for which BMS has previously exercised its US Rights, BMS may elect in its sole discretion to exercise its Global Rights with respect to such collaboration program to receive a worldwide, exclusive license to develop, manufacture and commercialize antibodies targeting the applicable Collaboration Target (the “Global License”). If BMS exercises its Global Rights, BMS would be obligated to pay the Company an additional exercise fee of $55.0 million for such collaboration program. The Global Rights would then replace the US Rights for that collaboration program, and BMS would have decision making authority over developing, obtaining and maintaining regulatory approval for, manufacturing and commercializing the Collaboration Products worldwide.

Term and Termination

Performance Obligations

The Company assessed the Collaboration Agreement and concluded that it represented a contract with a customer within the scope of ASC 606. Per ASC 606, a performance obligation is defined as a promise to transfer a good or service or a series of distinct goods or services. At inception of the Collaboration Agreement, the Company is not obligated to transfer any US License or Global License to BMS unless BMS exercises its US Rights or Global Rights, respectively, and the Company is not obligated to perform development activities under the development plan during preclinical and Phase 1 clinical trials including the regulatory filing of the IND.

Global License Agreement for the Tau/BMS-986446 Collaboration Target

Transaction Price

Significant Payment Terms

Revenue and Expense Recognition

Milestone and Royalties Accounting

Novo Nordisk Share Purchase Agreement

The Company excluded the milestone payments in the initial transaction price because such payments are considered to be variable considerations with constraint. Such milestone payments will be recognized as revenue at a point in time when the Company can conclude it is probable that a significant revenue reversal will not occur in future periods.

8. Shareholders' Equity

Ordinary Shares

The fair value of the options granted to employees and non-employee directors during the three months ended March 31, 2024 and 2023 was estimated as of the grant date using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model using the key assumptions listed in the following table:

The following table summarizes the Company’s stock option activity during the three months ended March 31, 2024:

Overview

Results of Operations

Our G&A expenses primarily consist of personnel costs and related expenses, including share-based compensation and consulting expenses.

We expect our R&D expenses to be relatively flat in 2024 over the prior year.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

ITEM 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

We must generate significant revenue to achieve and maintain profitability. Even if we succeed in discovering, developing, and commercializing one or more drug candidates, we may not be able to generate sufficient revenue and we may never be able to achieve or sustain profitability.

We have based our expectations relating to liquidity and capital resources on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could use our available capital resources sooner than we currently expect. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with the development and commercialization of our drug candidates, we are unable to estimate the amounts of increased capital outlays and operating expenses associated with completing the development and commercialization of our current drug candidates.

In the pharmaceutical industry, the research and development process is lengthy and involves a high degree of risk and uncertainty. This process is conducted in various stages and, during each stage, there is substantial risk that drug candidates in our research and development pipeline will experience difficulties, delays or failures. This makes it difficult to estimate the total costs to complete our clinical trials and to estimate anticipated completion dates with any degree of accuracy, which raises concerns that attempts to quantify costs and provide estimates of timing may be misleading by implying a greater degree of certainty than actually exists.

In order to develop and obtain regulatory approval for our drug candidates we will need to raise substantial additional funds. We expect to raise any such additional funds through public or private equity or debt financings, collaborative agreements with corporate partners, or other arrangements. Our ability to raise additional capital, including our ability to secure new collaborations, may also be adversely impacted by global economic conditions, including any disruptions to, and volatility in, the credit and financial markets in the United States and worldwide, geopolitical turmoil, and the ongoing conflict in Israel and any potential escalation or geographic expansion of such conflict, which could heighten other risks identified in this report. We cannot assure that additional funds will be available when we need them on terms that are acceptable to us or at all. If we raise additional funds by issuing equity securities, including pursuant to our Amended Distribution Agreement (as may be further amended from time to time), substantial dilution to existing shareholders would result. If we raise additional funds by incurring debt financing, the terms of the debt may involve significant cash payment obligations as well as covenants and specific financial ratios that may restrict our ability to operate our business. We may be required to relinquish rights to our technologies or drug candidates or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us in order to raise additional funds through strategic alliances, joint ventures, or licensing arrangements.

If adequate funds are not available on a timely basis, we may be required to:

In addition, if we do not meet our payment obligations to third parties as they come due, we may be subject to litigation claims. Even if we are successful in defending against these claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and distract management and may have unfavorable results that could further adversely impact our financial condition.

We are highly dependent on key personnel, including Dr. Gene G. Kinney, our President and Chief Executive Officer. There can be no assurance that we will be able to retain Dr. Kinney or any of our key personnel. The loss of the services of Dr. Kinney or any other person on whom we are highly dependent might impede the achievement of our research, development, and commercial objectives. We do not carry “key person” insurance covering any members of our senior management.

Attracting and retaining qualified scientific and other personnel are critical to our growth and future success. Competition for qualified personnel in our industry is intense. We may not be able to attract and retain these personnel on acceptable terms given that competition. Additionally, we may not be able to integrate and motivate qualified personnel to enable them to succeed in their positions. Failure to attract, integrate, retain, and motivate qualified personnel could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and/or growth prospects.

Some of our collaborators, prospective collaborators, and suppliers may need assurances that our financial resources and stability on a stand-alone basis are sufficient to satisfy their requirements for doing or continuing to do business with us. If our collaborators, prospective collaborators or suppliers are not satisfied with our financial resources and stability, it could have a material adverse effect on our ability to develop our drug candidates, enter into licenses or other agreements and on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

We entered into certain agreements with Elan in connection with our separation from Elan, which set forth the main terms of the separation and provided a framework for our initial relationship with Elan. These agreements may have terms that are materially disadvantageous to us or are otherwise not as favorable as those that might be negotiated between unaffiliated third parties. In December 2013, Elan was acquired by Perrigo Company plc (“Perrigo”), and in February 2014 Perrigo caused Elan to sell all of its shares of Prothena in an underwritten offering. As a result of the acquisition of Elan by Perrigo and the subsequent sale of all of its shares of Prothena, Perrigo may be less willing to collaborate with us in connection with the agreements to which we and Elan are a party and other matters.

The operational and financial impact of a business disruption beyond our control, such as a public health crisis, geopolitical turmoil, or an adverse weather event has, and could, adversely affect our business in the following ways:

Any one or more of these force majeure events could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity, results of operations, financial condition or business, including the progress of, and timelines for, our nonclinical and clinical development programs, and may create safety challenges for our employees and safe occupancy of our job sites, financial market volatility and significant macroeconomic uncertainty in global markets. Furthermore, any governmental or business actions, or any actions taken by individuals in response to any such events (including mandatory quarantines, travel restrictions, delay in operations of the U.S. FDA and comparable foreign regulatory agency, and interruptions to healthcare services), may divert healthcare resources away from the conduct of clinical trials and development programs.

Our business is increasingly dependent on critical, complex, and interdependent information technology systems to support business processes as well as internal and external communications. Despite the implementation of security measures, our internal computer systems, and those of our current and any future CROs and other contractors, consultants, and collaborators, have been subject to and remain vulnerable to damage from cyberattacks, “phishing” attacks, ransomware, computer viruses, unauthorized access, natural disasters, terrorism, war, and telecommunication or electrical failures. Attacks upon information technology systems are increasing in their frequency, levels of persistence, sophistication, and intensity, and are being conducted by sophisticated and organized groups and individuals with a wide range of motives and expertise. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, we may also face increased cybersecurity risks due to our reliance on internet technology and the number of our employees who are working remotely, which may create additional opportunities for cybercriminals to exploit vulnerabilities. Furthermore, because the techniques used to obtain unauthorized access to or to sabotage systems change frequently and often are not recognized until launched against a target, we may be unable to anticipate these techniques or implement adequate preventative measures. We may also experience security breaches that may remain undetected for an extended period. Any breakdown, malicious intrusion, or computer virus could result in the impairment of key business processes or breach of data security, which could result in a material disruption of our development programs and cause interruptions in our business operations, whether due to a loss of our trade secrets or other intellectual property or lead to unauthorized disclosure of personal data of our employees, third parties with which we do business, clinical trial participants, or others. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed or future clinical trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. In addition, such a breach may require notification to governmental agencies, the media, or individuals pursuant to applicable data privacy and security law and regulations. Such an event could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations.

We and our partners are subject to certain federal, state, and foreign data privacy and security laws and regulations. The legislative and regulatory landscape for privacy and data protection continues to evolve, and there has been an increasing focus on privacy and data protection issues, which may affect our business and may increase our compliance costs and exposure to liability. In the United States, numerous federal and state laws and regulations, including state security breach notification laws, federal and state health information privacy laws (including U.S. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”), as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, and regulations promulgated thereunder), and federal and state consumer protection laws (including Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act), govern the collection, use, disclosure, and protection of personal information. Each of these laws is subject to varying interpretations by courts and government agencies, creating complex compliance issues. State privacy laws in particular are evolving, with more than a dozen new state privacy laws passed in recent years, along with additional health privacy specific laws. These laws may further increase our compliance obligations, and potential legal privacy risks. For example, Washington recently passed the My Health My Data Act, which has a broader scope than HIPAA and includes a private right of action. In addition, we may obtain health information from third parties, including research institutions from which we obtain clinical trial data, that are subject to privacy and security requirements under HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, and the regulations promulgated thereunder. Depending on the facts and circumstances, we

Compliance with these and any other applicable privacy and data security laws and regulations is a rigorous and time-intensive process, and we may be required to substantially amend existing procedures and policies or put in place additional procedures and policies to ensure compliance with privacy and data protection rules and requirements. These changes could adversely impact our business by increasing operational and compliance costs or impact business practices. Further, there is a risk that the amended policies and procedures will not be implemented correctly or that individuals within the business will not be fully compliant with the new procedures. If we fail to comply with any such laws or regulations, we may face significant litigation, government investigations, fines and penalties as well as reputational damage which could adversely affect our business, operations, financial condition and prospects. Furthermore, the laws are not consistent, and compliance in the event of a widespread data breach is costly. In addition, states are constantly adopting new laws or amending existing laws, requiring attention to frequently changing regulatory requirements. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act (the “CCPA”) went into effect January 1, 2020. The CCPA, among other things, imposes new data privacy obligations on covered companies and provides expanded privacy rights to California residents, including the right to access, delete, and opt out of certain disclosures of their information. The CCPA provides for civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action with statutory damages for certain data breaches, which may increase the frequency and likelihood of data breach litigation. Although the law includes limited exceptions for health-related information, including clinical trial data, such exceptions may not apply to all of our operations and processing activities. Further, the California Privacy Rights Act (the “CPRA”) imposes additional data protection obligations on covered businesses, including additional consumer rights processes, limitations on data uses, audit requirements for higher risk data, and opt outs for certain uses of sensitive data. It also creates a California data protection agency authorized to issue substantive regulations and could result in increased privacy and information security enforcement. The majority of the provisions went into effect on January 1, 2023, and additional compliance investment and potential business process changes may be required. Although the CCPA currently exempts certain health-related information, including clinical trial data, the CCPA and the amendments under the CPRA may increase our compliance costs and potential liability.

Multiple states have followed California to legislate comprehensive privacy laws with data privacy rights. For example, Virginia passed the Virginia Consumer Data Protection Act, which went into effect on January 1, 2023, and affords consumers similar rights to the CCPA, along with additional rights, such as the right to opt-out of processing for profiling and targeted advertising purposes. Additionally, the Colorado Privacy Act and Connecticut Personal Data Privacy and Online Monitoring Act went into effect on July 1, 2023. While these new laws generally include exemptions for HIPAA-covered and clinical trial data, they impact the overall privacy landscape. Several other states have followed suit and passed similar legislation which will go into effect in the coming years. Further, additional privacy laws that are similar in nature have been proposed in other states and at the federal level and, if passed, such laws may have potentially conflicting requirements that would make compliance challenging.

We are also or may become subject to rapidly evolving data protection laws, rules, and regulations in foreign jurisdictions. For example, in the European Union (“EU”), the EU General Data Protection Regulation (the “EU GDPR”) governs the collection of, and other processing activities involving, personal data (i.e., data which identifies an individual or from which an individual is identifiable), including clinical trial data, and grants individuals various data protection rights (e.g., the right to the erasure of personal data). The EU GDPR imposes a number of obligations on companies, including inter alia: (i) accountability and transparency requirements, and enhanced requirements for obtaining valid consent; (ii) obligation to consider data protection when any new products or services are developed, and to limit the amount of personal data processed; and (iii) obligations to implement appropriate technical and organizational measures to safeguard personal data and to report certain personal data breaches to: (x) the data protection supervisory authority without undue delay (and no later than 72 hours, where feasible) after becoming aware of the personal data breach, unless the personal data breach is unlikely to result in a risk to the data subjects’ rights and freedoms; and (y) affected data subjects where the personal data breach is likely to result in a high risk to their rights and freedoms. In addition, the EU GDPR prohibits the transfer of personal data from the European Economic Area (“EEA”) to jurisdictions that the European Commission does not recognize as having “adequate” data protection laws unless a data transfer mechanism has been put in place or a derogation under the EU GDPR can be relied on. In July 2020, the Court of Justice of the EU limited how organizations could lawfully transfer personal data from the EEA to the United States by invalidating the EU-US Privacy Shield Framework for purposes of international transfers and imposing further restrictions on the use of standard contractual clauses (“EU SCCs”) including, a requirement for companies to carry out a transfer privacy impact assessment (“TIA”), which, among other things, assesses the laws governing access to personal data in the recipient country and considers whether supplementary measures that provide privacy protections additional to those provided under the EU SCCs will need to be implemented to ensure an “essentially equivalent” level of data protection to that afforded in the EEA. On July 31, 2023, the European Commission adopted its Final Implementing Decision granting the United States adequacy (“Adequacy Decision”), for EU-U.S. transfers of personal data for entities self-certified to the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework (“DPF”). Entities relying on EU SCCs for transfers to the United States are also able to rely on the analysis in the

The EU GDPR has been implemented (as implemented, the “UK GDPR”) in the United Kingdom (“UK”). The UK GDPR sits alongside the UK Data Protection Act 2018 which implements certain derogations in the EU GDPR into UK law. Under the UK GDPR, companies not established in the UK but which process personal data in relation to the offering of goods or services to individuals in the UK, or the monitoring of their behavior will be subject to the UK GDPR – the requirements of which are (at this time) largely aligned with those under the EU GDPR and as such, may lead to similar compliance and operational costs with potential fines up to the greater of £17.5 million or 4% of the noncompliant company’s total annual global turnover. The UK GDPR also imposes similar restrictions on international transfers of personal data from the UK to jurisdictions that the UK Government does not consider “adequate”. The UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office published: (i) its own form of EU SCCs, known as the International Data Transfer Agreement for transfers to outside the UK; (ii) a “UK addendum” to the new EU SCCs which amends the relevant provisions of such clauses to work in a UK context; and (iii) its own version of the TIA (although entities may choose to adopt either the EU or UK-style TIA). Further, on September 21, 2023, the UK Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology established a UK-U.S. data bridge (i.e., a UK equivalent of the Adequacy Decision) and adopted UK regulations to implement the UK-U.S. data bridge (“UK Adequacy Regulations”). Personal data may now be transferred from the UK under the UK-U.S. data bridge through the UK extension to the DPF to organizations self-certified under the UK extension to the DPF. The above-described changes may lead to additional costs and increase our overall risk exposure.

Compliance with U.S. and foreign data privacy and security laws, rules, and regulations have required us, and may require us in the future, to take on more onerous obligations in our contracts, require us to engage in costly compliance exercises, restrict our ability to collect, use and disclose data, or in some cases, impact our or our partners’ or suppliers’ ability to operate in certain jurisdictions. Each of these constantly evolving laws can be subject to varying interpretations. If we fail to comply with any such laws, rules, or regulations, we may face government investigations and/or enforcement actions, fines, civil or criminal penalties, private litigation, or adverse publicity that could adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

The success of our business depends substantially upon our ability to discover, develop, obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize our drug candidates successfully. Our research and development programs are prone to the significant and likely risks of failure inherent in drug development, which can result from the failure of the drug candidate to be sufficiently effective, the safety profile of the drug candidate, a clinical trial that is not sufficiently enrolled or powered or adequately designed to detect a drug effect, or other reasons. We intend to continue to invest most of our time and financial resources in our research and development programs.

Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of any drug candidate for a target indication, we must demonstrate with substantial evidence gathered in adequate and well-controlled clinical trials that the drug candidate is safe and effective for use for that target indication. In the U.S., this must be done to the satisfaction of the FDA; in the EU, this must be done to the satisfaction of the European Medicines Agency (the “EMA”); and in other countries this must be done to the satisfaction of comparable regulatory authorities.

Satisfaction of these and other regulatory requirements is costly, time consuming, uncertain, and subject to unanticipated delays. Despite our efforts, our drug candidates may not:

Positive results in nonclinical studies of a drug candidate may not be predictive of similar results in humans during clinical trials, and promising results from early clinical trials of a drug candidate may not be replicated in later clinical trials. Interim results of a clinical trial do not necessarily predict final results. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in late-stage clinical trials even after achieving promising results in early-stage development. Accordingly, the results from completed nonclinical studies and early clinical trials for our drug candidates may not be predictive of the results we may obtain in later stage studies or trials. Our nonclinical studies or clinical trials may produce negative or inconclusive results, and we may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional nonclinical studies or clinical trials, or to discontinue clinical trials altogether.

Furthermore, we have not marketed, distributed, or sold any products. Our success will, in addition to the factors discussed above, depend on the successful commercialization of any drug candidates that obtain regulatory approval. Successful commercialization may require:

Many of these factors are beyond our control. We do not expect any of our drug candidates to be commercially available for several years and some or all may never become commercially available. Accordingly, we may never generate revenues through the sale of products.

Research, development, commercialization and/or strategic collaborations, including those that we have with Roche and BMS, are subject to numerous risks, which include the following:

In addition, funding provided by a collaborator might not be sufficient to advance drug candidates under the collaboration.

Any one or more of these risks, if realized, could reduce or eliminate future revenue from drug candidates under our collaborations, and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and/or growth prospects.

Clinical trials may also be delayed or terminated as a result of ambiguous or negative data or results. In addition, a clinical trial may be delayed, suspended or terminated by us, the FDA, the EMA or other comparable regulatory authorities, the IRBs for the sites where the IRBs are overseeing a trial, or the safety oversight committee overseeing the clinical trial at issue due to a number of factors, including:

Additionally, changes in regulatory requirements and guidance may occur and we may need to amend clinical trial protocols to reflect these changes. Amendments may require us to resubmit our clinical trial protocols to regulatory authorities and IRBs for reexamination, which may impact the cost, timing, or successful completion of a clinical trial. For example, the FDA may modify or enhance clinical trial requirements which could affect enrollment and retention of patients. Such effects on recruitment and retention of patients may hinder or delay a clinical trial, which could increase costs and delay clinical programs.

We do not know whether our clinical trials will be conducted as planned, will need to be restructured, or will be completed on schedule, if at all. Delays in our clinical trials will result in increased development costs for our drug candidates. In addition, if we experience delays in the completion of, or if we terminate, any of our clinical trials, the commercial prospects for our drug candidates may be delayed or harmed and our ability to generate product revenues will be delayed or jeopardized. Furthermore, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of a drug candidate.

The time required to obtain approval by the FDA, the EMA, and other comparable regulatory authorities is inherently unpredictable but typically takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and depends upon numerous factors, including the substantial discretion of the regulatory authorities. In addition, approval policies, regulations, or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a drug candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions. We have not obtained regulatory approval for any drug candidate, and it is possible that none of our existing drug candidates or any drug candidates we may seek to develop in the future will ever obtain regulatory approval.

Our drug candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval for many reasons, including the following:

This lengthy approval process as well as the unpredictability of future clinical trial results may result in our failing to obtain regulatory approval to market our drug candidates, which would significantly harm our business, results of operations, and/or growth prospects.

In addition, even if we were to obtain approval, regulatory authorities may approve any of our drug candidates for fewer or more limited indications than we request, may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly post-marketing clinical trials, or may approve a drug candidate with a label that does not include the labeling claims necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of that drug candidate. Any of the foregoing scenarios could materially harm the commercial prospects for our drug candidates.

We are and may choose to conduct international clinical trials in the future. The acceptance of study data by the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authority from clinical trials conducted outside of their respective jurisdictions may be subject to certain conditions. In cases where data from foreign clinical trials are intended to serve as the basis for marketing approval in the United States, the FDA will generally not approve the application on the basis of foreign data alone unless (1) the data are applicable to the United States population and United States medical practice; (2) the trials are performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence; and (3) the data may be considered valid without the need for an on-site inspection by the FDA, or if the FDA considers such an inspection to be necessary, the FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. In addition, such foreign trials would be subject to the applicable local laws of the foreign jurisdictions where the trials are conducted. There can be no assurance that the FDA or any other comparable foreign regulatory authority will accept data from trials conducted outside of its applicable jurisdiction. If the FDA or any other comparable foreign regulatory authority does not accept such data, it would result in the need for additional trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and delay aspects of our business plan, and which may result in our product candidates not receiving approval for commercialization in the applicable jurisdiction.

In order to market drug candidates in a particular country or jurisdiction, we must establish and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of that country or jurisdiction, including with respect to safety and efficacy. Approval procedures vary among countries and can involve additional product testing and additional administrative review periods. The time required to obtain approval in other countries might differ from that required to obtain, for example, FDA approval in the U.S. or EMA approval in the EU. The regulatory approval process in other countries may include all of the risks detailed above regarding FDA approval in the U.S. and EMA approval in the EU as well as other risks. Regulatory approval in one country or jurisdiction does not ensure regulatory approval in another country or jurisdiction, but a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one country may have a negative effect on the regulatory process in others. Failure to obtain regulatory approval in one country or jurisdiction or any delay or setback in obtaining such approval would impair our ability to develop other markets for that drug candidate.

On January 27, 2021, the FDA agreed to a SPA for our Phase 3 AFFIRM-AL clinical trial of birtamimab. The FDA’s SPA process is designed to facilitate the FDA’s review and approval of drugs by allowing the FDA to evaluate proposed critical design features of certain clinical trials that are intended to form the primary basis for determining a drug candidate’s efficacy and safety. Upon specific request by a clinical trial sponsor, the FDA will evaluate the study protocol and statistical analysis plan and respond to a sponsor’s questions regarding protocol design and scientific and regulatory requirements. FDA aims to complete SPA reviews within 45 days of receipt of the request. The FDA ultimately assesses whether specific elements of the protocol design for the trial, such as entry criteria, endpoints, size, duration, and planned analyses, are acceptable to support an

Although the FDA has agreed to the SPA for our Phase 3 AFFIRM-AL clinical trial with respect to the primary endpoint and certain other aspects of the clinical trial, a SPA agreement does not guarantee approval of a drug candidate. The FDA may limit the scope of its agreement to a SPA agreement to certain, specific aspects of the clinical trial design. Even if the FDA agrees to the design, execution, and analysis proposed in a protocol reviewed under the SPA process, the FDA may revoke or alter its agreement in certain circumstances. In particular, a SPA agreement is not binding on the FDA if public health concerns emerge that were unrecognized at the time of the SPA agreement, other new scientific concerns regarding product safety or efficacy arise, the sponsor fails to comply with the agreed upon study protocol, or the relevant data, assumptions, or information provided by the sponsor in a request for the SPA change or are found to be false or to omit relevant facts. In addition, even after a SPA agreement is finalized, the SPA agreement may be modified, and such modification will be deemed binding on the FDA review division, except under the circumstances described above, if the FDA and the sponsor agree in writing to the modification of the study protocol and/or statistical analysis plan. Generally, such modification is intended to improve the study. The FDA retains significant latitude and discretion in interpreting the terms of the SPA agreement and the data and results from any study that is the subject of the SPA agreement.

Moreover, if the FDA revokes or alters its agreement under the SPA, or interprets the data collected from the clinical trial differently than the sponsor, the FDA may not deem the data sufficient to support an application for regulatory approval.

Both before and after regulatory approval to market a particular drug candidate, adverse event reporting, manufacturing, labeling, packaging, storage, distribution, advertising, promotion, record keeping, and reporting related to the product are subject to extensive, ongoing regulatory requirements. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, as well as continued compliance with current good manufacturing practice (“cGMP”) requirements and current good clinical practice (“cGCP”) requirements for any clinical trials that we conduct. Any regulatory approvals that we receive for our drug candidates may also be subject to 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 Phase 4 clinical trials, and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the drug candidate. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or not previously observed in clinical trials, or problems with our third-party manufacturers or manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with the regulatory requirements of the FDA, the EMA, or other comparable regulatory authorities could subject us to administrative or judicially imposed sanctions, including:

The policies of the FDA, the EMA, or other comparable regulatory authority may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our drug candidates. 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, which would adversely affect our business, prospects and ability to achieve or sustain profitability.

Undesirable side effects caused by our drug candidates could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA, the EMA, or other comparable regulatory authorities. Drug-related side effects could affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete a trial or result in potential product liability claims. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly. Even if any of our drug candidates receives marketing approval, as greater numbers of patients use a drug following its approval, an increase in the incidence or severity of side effects or the incidence of other post-approval problems that were not seen or anticipated during pre-approval clinical trials could result in a number of potentially significant negative consequences, including:

Any of these events could substantially increase the costs and expenses of developing, commercializing and marketing any such drug candidates or could harm or prevent sales of any approved products.

Some of our research and development activities involve the controlled storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials. We are subject to U.S. federal, state, local, and other countries’ and jurisdictions’ laws and regulations governing the use, manufacture, storage, handling, and disposal of these hazardous materials. Although we believe that our safety procedures for the handling and disposing of these materials comply with the standards prescribed by these laws and regulations, we cannot eliminate the risk of accidental contamination or injury from these materials. In the event of an accident, state or federal authorities may curtail our use of these materials, and we could be liable for any civil damages that result, which may exceed our financial resources and may seriously harm our business. Because we believe that our laboratory and materials handling policies and practices sufficiently mitigate the likelihood of materials liability or third-party claims, we currently carry no insurance covering such claims. An accident could damage, or force us to shut down, our operations.

Even if any drug candidates we may develop or acquire in the future obtain regulatory approval, they may not gain broad market acceptance among physicians, healthcare payers, patients and the medical community. The degree of market acceptance for any approved drug candidate will depend on a number of factors, including:

Consequently, even if we discover, develop, and commercialize a product, the product may fail to achieve broad market acceptance and we may not be able to generate significant revenue from the product.

The success of sales of prasinezumab in the U.S. will be dependent on the ability of Roche to successfully develop in collaboration with us, and launch and commercialize prasinezumab, if approved by the FDA, pursuant to the License Agreement we entered into in December 2013. Our collaboration with Roche is complex, particularly with respect to future U.S. commercialization of prasinezumab, with respect to financial provisions, allocations of responsibilities, cost estimates, and the respective rights of the parties in decision making. Accordingly, significant aspects of the development and commercialization of prasinezumab require Roche to execute its responsibilities under the arrangement, or require Roche’s agreement or approval, prior to implementation, which could cause significant delays that may materially impact the potential success of prasinezumab in the U.S. In addition, Roche may under some circumstances independently develop products that compete with prasinezumab, or Roche may decide to not commit sufficient resources to the development, commercialization, marketing and distribution of prasinezumab. If we are not able to collaborate effectively with Roche on plans and efforts to develop and commercialize prasinezumab, our business could be materially adversely affected.

In May 2021, we opted out of profit and loss sharing with Roche for prasinezumab in Parkinson’s disease. However, pursuant to the License Agreement, we are responsible for 30% of all development and commercialization costs for any future Licensed Products and/or indications (other than Parkinson’s disease with prasinezumab) that we opt to co-develop, in each case unless we elect to opt out of profit and loss sharing. If we elect to opt out of profit and loss sharing, we will instead receive sales milestones and royalties, and our revenue, if any, from such other Licensed Products and/or indications will be reduced.

Our right to co-develop Licensed Products and/or indications under the License Agreement (other than Parkinson’s disease with prasinezumab for which we have opted out of co-development) will terminate if we commence certain studies for a competitive product that treats Parkinson’s disease or other indications that we opted to co-develop. In addition, our right to co-promote prasinezumab and other Licensed Products will terminate if we commence a Phase 3 study for a competitive product that treats Parkinson’s disease.

Moreover, under the terms of the License Agreement, we rely on Roche to provide us estimates of their costs, revenue, and revenue adjustments and royalties, which estimates we use in preparing our quarterly and annual financial reports. If the underlying assumptions on which Roche’s estimates were based prove to be incorrect, actual results or revised estimates supplied by Roche that are materially different from the original estimates could require us to adjust the estimates included in our reported financial results. If material, these adjustments could require us to restate previously reported financial results, which could have a negative effect on our stock price.

Our ability to receive any significant revenue from prasinezumab will be dependent on Roche’s efforts and may result in lower levels of income than if we marketed or developed our drug candidates entirely on our own. Roche may not fulfill its

In the event that Roche does not diligently develop and commercialize prasinezumab, the License Agreement provides us the right to terminate the License Agreement in connection with a material breach uncured for 90 days after notice thereof. However, our ability to enforce the provisions of the License Agreement so as to obtain meaningful recourse within a reasonable timeframe is uncertain. Further, any decision to pursue available remedies including termination would impact the potential success of prasinezumab, including inside the U.S., and we may choose not to terminate as we may not be able to find another partner and any new collaboration likely will not provide comparable financial terms to those in our arrangement with Roche. In the event of our termination, this may require us to develop and commercialize prasinezumab on our own, which is likely to result in significant additional expense and delay. Significant changes in Roche’s business strategy, resource commitment and the willingness or ability of Roche to complete its obligations under our arrangement could materially affect the potential success of the drug candidate. Furthermore, if Roche does not successfully develop and commercialize prasinezumab outside of the U.S., our potential to generate future revenue outside of the U.S. would be significantly reduced.

We do not currently have a fully-scaled organization for the sales, marketing, and distribution of pharmaceutical products. In order to market any products that may be approved by the FDA, the EMA, or other comparable regulatory authorities, we must build our sales, marketing, managerial, and other non-technical capabilities or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services.

We have entered into the License Agreement with Roche for the development of prasinezumab and may develop our own sales force and marketing infrastructure to co-promote prasinezumab in the U.S. for the treatment of Parkinson’s disease and any future Licensed Products approved for Parkinson’s disease in the U.S. If we exercise our co-promotion option and are unable to develop our own sales force and marketing infrastructure to effectively commercialize prasinezumab or other Licensed Products, our ability to generate additional revenue from potential sales of prasinezumab or such products in the U.S. may be harmed. In addition, our right to co-promote prasinezumab and other Licensed Products will terminate if we commence a Phase 3 study for a competitive product that treats Parkinson’s disease.

For any other products that may be approved, if we are unable to establish adequate sales, marketing, and distribution capabilities, whether independently or with third parties, we may not be able to generate product revenue and may not become profitable.

In both U.S. and non-U.S. markets, our sales of any future products will depend in part upon the availability of reimbursement from third-party payers. Such third-party payers include government health programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, managed care providers, private health insurers, and other organizations. There is significant uncertainty related to the third-party coverage and reimbursement of newly approved drugs. Coverage and reimbursement may not be available for any drug that we or our collaborators commercialize and, even if these are available, the level of reimbursement may not be satisfactory. Third-party payers often rely upon Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement policies. Third-party payers are also increasingly attempting to contain healthcare costs by demanding price discounts or rebates limiting both coverage and the amounts that they will pay for new drugs, and, as a result, they may not

Additionally, pursuant to the Medicaid Drug Rebate Statute, we will be required to participate in the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program in order for federal payment to be available for our products under Medicaid and Medicare Part B. Under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, we will be required to, among other things, pay a rebate to each state Medicaid program for quantities of our products utilized on an outpatient basis (with some exceptions) that are dispensed to Medicaid beneficiaries and paid for by a state Medicaid program. Medicaid Drug Rebate Program rebates are calculated using a statutory formula, state-reported utilization data, and pricing data that are calculated and reported by us on a monthly and quarterly basis to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”). These data include the average manufacturer price and, in the case of single source and innovator multiple source products, the best price for each drug.

The regulations that govern marketing approvals, pricing, coverage, and reimbursement for new drugs vary widely from country to country. Current and future legislation may significantly change the approval requirements in ways that could involve additional costs and cause delays in obtaining approvals. Some countries require approval of the sale price of a drug before it can be marketed. In many countries, the pricing review period begins after marketing or licensing approval is granted. In some countries, prescription pharmaceutical pricing remains subject to continuing governmental control even after initial approval is granted. As a result, we or our collaborators might obtain marketing approval for a drug in a particular country, but then be subject to price regulations that delay commercial launch of the drug, possibly for lengthy time periods, and negatively impact our ability to generate revenue from the sale of the drug in that country. Adverse pricing limitations may hinder our ability to recoup our investment in one or more drug candidates, even if our drug candidates obtain marketing approval.

U.S. and other governments continue to propose and pass legislation designed to reduce the cost of healthcare. In the U.S., we expect that there will continue to be federal and state proposals to implement similar governmental controls. In addition, recent changes in the Medicare program and increasing emphasis on managed care in the U.S. will continue to put pressure on pharmaceutical product pricing. For example, in 2010, the U.S. Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the U.S. Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act (collectively, the “ACA”), was enacted. The ACA substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers and significantly affects the pharmaceutical industry. Among the provisions of the ACA of importance to the pharmaceutical industry are the following:

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. These changes include aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect in 2013 and will stay in effect through the first six months of the FY 2032 sequestration order, unless additional congressional action is taken, with the exception of a temporary suspension from May 1, 2020, through March 31, 2022, and a subsequent 1% cut in Medicare payments in effect from March 31, 2022 to July 1, 2022, due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2013, the U.S. American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. These new laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, which could have a material adverse effect on customers for our drugs, if approved, and, accordingly, our financial operations.

Additionally, on October 14, 2022, President Biden issued an Executive Order on Lowering Prescription Drug Costs for Americans, which instructed the Secretary of HHS to consider whether to select for testing by the CMS Innovation Center new health care payment and delivery models that would lower drug costs and promote access to innovative drug therapies for beneficiaries enrolled in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. On February 14, 2023, HHS issued a report in response to the October 14, 2022 Executive Order, which, among other things, selects three potential drug affordability and accessibility models to be tested by the CMS Innovation Center. Specifically, the report addresses: (1) a model that would allow Part D Sponsors to establish a “high-value drug list” setting the maximum co-payment amount for certain common generic drugs at $2.00; (2) a Medicaid-focused model that would establish a partnership between CMS, manufacturers, and state Medicaid agencies that would result in multi-state outcomes-based agreements or certain cell and gene therapy drugs; and (3) a model that would adjust Medicare Part B payment amounts for Accelerated Approval Program drugs to advance the developments of novel treatments.

We expect that other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved drug. Legislation and regulations affecting the pricing of pharmaceuticals might change before our drug candidates are approved for marketing. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government healthcare programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payers. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our drugs.

There can be no assurance that our drug candidates, if they are approved for sale in the U.S. or in other countries, will be considered medically reasonable and necessary for a specific indication, that they will be considered cost-effective by third-party payers, that coverage or an adequate level of reimbursement will be available, or that third-party payers’ reimbursement policies will not adversely affect our ability to sell our drug candidates profitably if they are approved for sale.

The research, development, and commercialization of new drugs is highly competitive. We will face competition with respect to all drug candidates we may develop or commercialize in the future from pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies worldwide. The key factors affecting the success of any approved product will be its indication, label, efficacy, safety profile, drug interactions, method of administration, pricing, coverage, reimbursement, and level of promotional activity relative to those of competing drugs.

Furthermore, many large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic institutions, governmental agencies, and other public and private research organizations are pursuing the development of novel drugs that target the same indications we are targeting with our research and development program. We face, and expect to continue to face, intense and increasing competition as new products enter the market and advanced technologies become available. Many of our competitors have:

Competitive products may render our research and development program obsolete or noncompetitive before we can recover the expenses of developing and commercializing our drug candidates. Furthermore, the development of new treatment methods and/or the widespread adoption or increased utilization of any vaccine or development of other products or treatments for the diseases we are targeting could render any of our drug candidates noncompetitive, obsolete or uneconomical. If we successfully develop and obtain approval for a drug candidate, we will face competition based on the safety and effectiveness of the approved product, the timing of its entry into the market in relation to competitive products in development, the availability and cost of supply, marketing and sales capabilities, coverage, reimbursement, price, patent position and other factors. Even if we successfully develop drug candidates but those drug candidates do not achieve and maintain market acceptance, our business will not be successful.

Our current drug candidates are regulated by the FDA as biologic products and we intend to seek approval for these products pursuant to the BLA pathway. The U.S. Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (the “BPCIA”) created an abbreviated pathway for the approval of biosimilar and interchangeable biologic products. The abbreviated regulatory pathway establishes legal authority for the FDA to review and approve biosimilar biologics, including the possible designation of a biosimilar as “interchangeable” based on its similarity to an existing brand product.

Under the BPCIA, an application for a biosimilar product cannot be submitted to the FDA until four years following the date that the reference product was first licensed by the FDA, and cannot be approved by the FDA until 12 years after the original branded product was approved under a BLA. The BPCIA also created certain exclusivity periods for biosimilars approved as interchangeable products. However, during the 12-year period of reference product exclusivity, another company may obtain FDA licensure and market a competing version of the reference product if the FDA approves a full de novo BLA, not an abbreviated BLA for a biosimilar product, for the competing product containing that applicant’s own preclinical data and data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of its product.

The law is complex and is still being interpreted and implemented by the FDA. Any processes adopted by the FDA to implement the BPCIA could have a material adverse effect on the future commercial prospects for our biologic products. In addition, there has been discussion of whether Congress should reduce the 12-year reference product exclusivity period. Other aspects of the BPCIA, some of which may impact the BPCIA exclusivity provisions, have also been the subject of recent litigation. As a result, the ultimate implementation of the BPCIA is subject to significant uncertainty.

We believe that any of our drug candidates approved as a biologic product under a BLA should qualify for the 12-year period of exclusivity. However, there is a risk that this exclusivity could be shortened due to congressional action or otherwise, or that the FDA will not consider our drug candidates to be reference products for competing products, potentially creating the opportunity for generic competition sooner than anticipated. Moreover, the extent to which a biosimilar, once approved, will be

Our operations and activities are directly, or indirectly through our service providers and collaborators, subject to numerous healthcare and other laws and regulations, including, without limitation, those relating to anti-bribery, anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, false claims, physician payment transparency, and health information privacy and security, in the U.S., the EU, and other countries and jurisdictions in which we conduct our business. These laws include:

Ensuring our compliance with applicable laws and regulations involves substantial costs, and it is possible that governmental authorities or third parties will assert that our business practices fail to comply with these laws and regulations. If our actions are found to be in violation of any laws and regulations, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal, and administrative damages, penalties, and fines, as well as exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs, curtailment or restructuring of our operations, and reputational harm, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations.

The use of our drug candidates in clinical trials and the sale of any products for which we obtain marketing approval will expose us to the risk of product liability and clinical trial liability claims. Product liability claims might be brought against us by consumers, healthcare providers, or others selling or otherwise coming into contact with our products. Clinical trial liability claims may be filed against us for damages suffered by clinical trial subjects or their families. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against product liability claims, we could incur substantial liabilities. In addition, regardless of merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims may result in:

We currently have clinical trial liability insurance coverage for all of our clinical trials. However, our insurance coverage may not be sufficient to reimburse us for any expenses or losses we may suffer. Moreover, insurance coverage is becoming increasingly expensive, and, 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 due to liability. If and when we obtain marketing approval for any of our drug candidates, we intend to expand our insurance coverage to include the sale of commercial products; however, we may be unable to obtain this product liability insurance on commercially reasonable terms. On occasion, large judgments have been awarded in class action lawsuits based on drugs that had unanticipated side effects. A successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against us could cause our ordinary share price to decline and, if judgments exceed our insurance coverage, could decrease our cash and adversely affect our business.

We do not have the ability to independently conduct clinical trials for our drug candidates, and we rely on third parties, such as consultants, contract research organizations, medical institutions, and clinical investigators to assist us with these activities. Our reliance on these third parties for clinical development activities results in reduced control over these activities. Furthermore, these third parties may also have relationships with other entities, some of which may be our competitors. Although we have and will enter into agreements with these third parties, we will be responsible for confirming that our clinical trials are conducted in accordance with their general investigational plans and protocols. Moreover, the FDA, the EMA, and other comparable regulatory authorities require us to comply with regulations and standards, commonly referred to as cGCPs, for conducting, recording, and reporting the results of clinical trials to assure that data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the trial participants are adequately protected. Our reliance on third parties does not relieve us of these responsibilities and requirements. If we or any of our third-party contractors fail to comply with applicable cGCPs, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA, the EMA, or other comparable regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our clinical trials complies with cGCP regulations. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product produced under cGMPs. Our failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process. Requirements regarding clinical trial data may evolve, and any such changes to data requirements may cause the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities to disagree with data from preclinical studies or clinical trials, and to require further studies.

To date, we believe our consultants, contract research organizations, and other third parties with which we are working have generally performed satisfactorily; however, if these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines, or comply with applicable regulations, we have been, and may be, required to replace them. Although we believe that there are a number of other third-party contractors we could engage to continue these activities, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative third-party contractors or to do so on commercially reasonable terms, which may result in a delay of our planned clinical trials. Accordingly, we may be delayed in obtaining regulatory approvals for our drug candidates and may be delayed in our efforts to successfully develop our drug candidates.

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

Research, development, and potential commercialization of our drug candidates will require substantial additional cash to fund expenses. Our strategy includes potentially collaborating with additional leading pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to assist us in furthering research, development, and/or potential commercialization of some of our drug candidates in some or all geographies. It may be difficult to enter into one or more of such collaborations in the future. We face significant competition in seeking appropriate collaborators and these collaborations are complex and time-consuming to negotiate and document. We may not be able to negotiate collaborations on acceptable terms, or at all, in which case we may have to curtail the development of a particular drug candidate, reduce or delay its development program or one or more of our other development programs, delay its potential commercialization or increase our expenditures and undertake development or commercialization activities at our own expense. 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, or at all. If we do not have sufficient funds, we will not be able to bring our drug candidates to market and generate product revenue.

We do not own or operate facilities for the manufacture, packaging, labeling, storage, testing, or distribution of nonclinical or clinical supplies of any of our drug candidates. We instead contract with and rely on third parties to manufacture, package, label, store, test, and distribute nonclinical and clinical supplies of our drug candidates, and we plan to continue to do so for the foreseeable future. We also rely on third-party consultants to assist us with managing these third parties and with our manufacturing strategy. Certain of these third parties have failed to perform these activities for us and any of these third parties may fail to perform these activities for us in the future, which could cause nonclinical or clinical development of our drug candidates to be delayed, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and/or growth prospects.

If the FDA, the EMA, or any other comparable regulatory authority approves any of our drug candidates for commercial sale, we expect to continue to rely, at least initially, on third parties to manufacture, package, label, store, test, and distribute commercial supplies of such approved drug product. Significant scale-up of manufacturing may require additional comparability validation studies, which the FDA, the EMA, or other comparable regulatory authorities must review and approve. Our third-party manufacturers might not be able to successfully establish such comparability or increase their manufacturing capacity in a timely or economic manner, or at all. If our third-party manufacturers are unable to successfully establish comparability or increase their manufacturing capacity for any drug product, and we are unable to timely establish our own manufacturing capabilities, the commercial launch of that drug candidate could be delayed or there could be a shortage in supply, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and/or growth prospects.

Our third-party manufacturers’ facilities could be damaged by fire, power interruption, information system failure, natural disaster or other similar event, which could cause a delay or shortage in supplies of our drug candidates, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and/or growth prospects.

Our drug candidates require, and any future drug product will require, precise, high quality manufacturing, packaging, labeling, storage, and testing that meet stringent cGMP, other regulatory requirements and other standards. Our third-party manufacturers are subject to ongoing periodic and unannounced inspections by the FDA, the EMA, and other comparable regulatory authorities to ensure compliance with these cGMPs, other regulatory requirements and other standards. We do not have control over, and are dependent upon, our third-party manufacturers’ compliance with these cGMPs, regulations and standards. Any failure by a third-party manufacturer to comply with these cGMPs, regulations or standards or that compromises the safety of any of our drug candidates or any drug product could cause a delay or suspension of production of nonclinical or clinical supplies of our drug candidates or commercial supplies of drug product, cause a delay or suspension of nonclinical or clinical development, product approval and/or commercialization of our drug candidates or drug product, result in seizure or recall of clinical or commercial supplies, result in fines and civil penalties, result in liability for any patient injury or death or otherwise increase our costs, any of which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and/or growth prospects. If a third-party manufacturer cannot or fails to perform its contractual commitments, does not have sufficient capacity to meet our nonclinical, clinical or eventual commercial requirements or fails to meet cGMPs, regulations or other standards, we have been, and may be, required to replace it or qualify an additional third-party

We rely on third-party suppliers for the raw materials required for the production of our drug candidates. Our dependence on these third-party suppliers and the challenges we may face in obtaining adequate supplies of raw materials involve several risks, including limited control over pricing, availability, quality, and delivery schedules. We cannot be certain that our suppliers will continue to provide us with the quantities of these raw materials that we require or satisfy our anticipated specifications and quality requirements. Any supply interruption in limited or sole sourced raw materials could materially harm our ability to manufacture our products until a new source of supply, if any, could be identified and qualified. Although we believe there are currently several other suppliers of these raw materials, we may be unable to find a sufficient alternative supply channel in a reasonable time or on commercially reasonable terms. Any performance failure on the part of our suppliers could delay the development and potential commercialization of our drug candidates, including limiting supplies necessary for clinical trials and regulatory approvals, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.

Our success depends in part on our ability to obtain patent protection both in the U.S. and in other countries for our drug candidates. Our ability to protect our drug candidates from unauthorized or infringing use by third parties depends in substantial part on our ability to obtain and maintain valid and enforceable patents. Due to evolving legal standards relating to the patentability, validity and enforceability of patents covering pharmaceutical inventions and the scope of claims made under these patents, our ability to obtain, maintain and enforce patents is uncertain and involves complex legal, factual and scientific questions. Accordingly, rights under any issued patents may not provide us with sufficient protection for our drug candidates or provide sufficient protection to afford us a commercial advantage against competitive products or processes. Additionally, our ability to obtain patent protection for our drug candidates also depends on our collaborators, partners, contractors, and employees involved in the generation of intellectual property to carry out their contractual duties, including those to assign or license relevant intellectual property rights developed on our behalf to us.

In addition, the strength of patents in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical field can be uncertain, and evaluating the scope of such patents involves complex legal, factual, and scientific analyses and has in recent years been the subject of much litigation, resulting in court decisions, including Supreme Court decisions, which have increased uncertainties as to the ability to enforce patent rights in the future. We cannot guarantee that any patents will issue from any pending or future patent applications owned by or licensed to us or our affiliates. In addition, the coverage claimed in a patent application can be significantly reduced before the patent is issued, and its scope can be reinterpreted after issuance. Consequently, we may not obtain or maintain adequate patent protection for any of our programs and product candidates. Even if patents have issued or will issue, we cannot guarantee that the claims of these patents are or will be valid or enforceable or will provide us with any significant protection against competitive products or otherwise be commercially valuable to us. Patent applications in the U.S. are maintained in confidence for up to 18 months after their filing. In some cases, however, patent applications remain confidential in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the “USPTO”) for the entire time prior to issuance as a U.S. patent. Similarly, publication of discoveries in the scientific or patent literature often lags behind actual discoveries. Consequently, we cannot be certain that we or our licensors or co-owners were the first to invent, or the first to file patent applications on, our drug candidates or their use as drugs. In the event that a third party has also filed a U.S. patent application relating to our drug candidates or a similar invention, we may have to participate in interference or derivation proceedings declared by the USPTO to determine priority of invention in the U.S. The costs of these proceedings could be substantial and it is possible that our efforts would be unsuccessful, resulting in a loss of our U.S. patent position. Furthermore, we may not have identified all U.S. and non-U.S. patents or published applications that affect our business either by blocking our ability to commercialize our drugs or by covering similar technologies. Composition-of-matter patents on the biological or chemical active pharmaceutical ingredient are generally considered to be the strongest form of intellectual property protection for pharmaceutical products, as such patents provide protection without regard to any method of use. We cannot be certain that the claims in our patent applications covering composition-of-matter of our drug candidates will be considered patentable by the USPTO and courts in the U.S. or by the patent offices and courts in other countries, nor can we be certain that the claims in our issued composition-of-matter patents will not be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged. Method-of-use patents protect the use of a product for the specified method. This type of patent does not prevent a competitor from making and marketing a product that is identical to our product for an indication that is outside the scope of the patented method. Moreover, even if competitors do not actively promote their product for our targeted indications, physicians may prescribe these products “off-label.” Although off-label prescriptions may infringe or contribute to the infringement of method-of-use patents, the practice is common and such infringement is difficult to prevent or prosecute.

Periodic maintenance fees on any issued patent are due to be paid to the USPTO and foreign patent agencies in several stages over the lifetime of the patent. The USPTO 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. Although an inadvertent lapse, including due to the effect of geopolitical conflict on us or our patent maintenance vendors, can in many cases be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which noncompliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Noncompliance events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent

Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, if all maintenance fees are paid timely, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years after its first effective filing date. Although various extensions may be available, the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing, and regulatory review of new drug candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such drug candidates are commercialized. Even if patents covering our drug candidates are obtained, once a patent covering a drug candidate has expired, we may be open to competition, including biosimilar or generic medications. As a result, our patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing drug candidates similar or identical to ours. Our patents issued as of December 31, 2023, are anticipated to expire on dates ranging from 2024 to 2042, subject to any patent extensions that may be available for such patents. If patents are issued on our patent applications pending as of December 31, 2023, the resulting patents are projected to expire on dates ranging from 2025 to 2044. In addition, although upon issuance in the United States a patent’s life can be increased based on certain delays caused by the USPTO, this increase can be reduced or eliminated based on certain delays caused by the patent applicant during patent prosecution. A patent term extension based on regulatory delay may be available in the United States. However, only a single patent can be extended for each first regulatory review period for a product, and any patent can be extended only once, for a single product. Moreover, the scope of protection during the period of the patent term extension does not extend to the full scope of the claim, but instead only to the scope of the product as approved. Laws governing analogous patent term extensions in foreign jurisdictions vary widely, as do laws governing the ability to obtain multiple patents from a single patent family. Additionally, we may not receive an extension if we fail to exercise due diligence during the testing phase or regulatory review process, apply within applicable deadlines, fail to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise fail to satisfy applicable requirements. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or restoration, or the term of any such extension is less than we request, the period during which we will have the right to exclusively market our product will be shortened and our competitors may obtain approval of competing products following our patent expiration and may take advantage of our investment in development and clinical trials by referencing our clinical and preclinical data to launch their product earlier than might otherwise be the case, and our revenue could be reduced, possibly materially. If we do not have sufficient patent life to protect our products, our business and results of operations will be adversely affected.

In addition, the agreements under which we license intellectual property or technology to or 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/or growth 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 the affected drug candidates. Our business also would suffer if any current or future licensors fail to abide by the terms of the license, if the licensors fail to enforce licensed patents against infringing third parties, if the licensed patents or other rights are found to be invalid or unenforceable, or if we are unable to enter into necessary licenses on acceptable terms. Moreover, our licensors may own or control intellectual property that has not been licensed to us and, as a result, we may be subject to claims, regardless of their merit, that we are infringing or otherwise violating the licensor’s rights.

In addition, while we cannot currently determine the amount of the royalty obligations we would be required to pay on sales of future products, if any, the amounts may be significant. The amount of our future royalty obligations will depend on the technology and intellectual property we use in products that we successfully develop and commercialize, if any. Therefore, even if we successfully develop and commercialize products, we may be unable to achieve or maintain profitability.

If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property rights or maintain the existing intellectual property rights we have, we may have to abandon development of the relevant research programs or drug candidates and our business, financial condition, results of operations, and/or growth prospects could suffer.

Licensing of intellectual property is of critical importance to our business and involves complex legal, business and scientific issues and is complicated by the rapid pace of scientific discovery in our industry. Disputes may also arise between us and our licensors regarding intellectual property subject to a license agreement, including those relating to:

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

If the licensor retains control of prosecution of the patents and patent applications licensed to us, we may have limited or no control over the manner in which the licensor chooses to prosecute or maintain its patents and patent applications and have limited or no right to continue to prosecute any patents or patent applications that the licensor elects to abandon. If our licensors or any future licensees having rights to file, prosecute, maintain, and defend our patent rights fail to conduct these activities for patents or patent applications covering any of our drug candidates, including due to the impact of geopolitical conflict on our licensors’ business operations, our ability to develop and commercialize those drug candidates may be adversely affected and we may not be able to prevent competitors from making, using, or selling competing products. We cannot be certain that such activities by our licensors have been or will be conducted in compliance with applicable laws and regulations or will result in valid and enforceable patents or other intellectual property rights. Pursuant to the terms of the license agreements with some of our licensors, the licensors may have the right to control enforcement of our licensed patents or defense of any claims asserting the invalidity of these patents and, even if we are permitted to pursue such enforcement or defense, we cannot ensure the cooperation of our licensors. We cannot be certain that our licensors will allocate sufficient resources or prioritize their or our enforcement of such patents or defense of such claims to protect our interests in the licensed patents. Even if we are not a party to these legal actions, an adverse outcome could harm our business because it might prevent us from continuing to license intellectual property that we may need to operate our business. In addition, even when we have the right to control patent prosecution of licensed patents and patent applications, enforcement of licensed patents, or defense of claims asserting the invalidity of those patents, we may still be adversely affected or prejudiced by actions or inactions of our licensors and their counsel that took place prior to or after our assuming control. In the event we breach any of our obligations related to such prosecution, we may incur significant liability to our licensing partners.

Our drug candidates may also require specific components to work effectively and efficiently, and rights to those components may be held by others. We may be unable to in-license any compositions, methods of use, processes or other third-party intellectual property rights from third parties that we identify. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, which would harm our business. If we fail to obtain licenses to necessary third-party intellectual property rights, we may need to cease use of the compositions or methods covered by such third-party intellectual property rights and may need to seek to develop alternative approaches that do not infringe on such intellectual property rights which may entail additional costs and development delays, even if we were able to develop such alternatives, which may not be feasible. Even if we are able to obtain a license, it may be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to develop or license replacement technology. Any delays in entering into new collaborations or strategic partnership agreements related to our drug candidates could delay the development and commercialization of our drug candidates in certain geographies, which could harm our business prospects, financial condition, and results of operations.

The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive practice, and companies that may be more established, or have greater resources than we do, may also be pursuing strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider necessary or attractive in order to commercialize our drug candidates. More established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their larger size and cash resources or greater clinical

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. Patent litigation is costly and time consuming. We may not have sufficient resources to bring these actions to a successful conclusion. In addition, if we do not obtain a license, develop or obtain non-infringing technology, fail to defend an infringement action successfully, or have infringed patents declared invalid, we may:

We rely on trade secrets to protect our proprietary technologies, especially where we do not believe patent protection is appropriate or obtainable; however, trade secrets are difficult to protect. We rely in part on confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, outside scientific collaborators, sponsored researchers, and other advisors to protect our trade secrets

Our ordinary shares commenced trading on the Nasdaq Global Market on December 21, 2012 and currently trade on the Nasdaq Global Select Market. We cannot predict the prices at which our ordinary shares may trade. The market price of our ordinary shares may fluctuate widely, depending upon many factors, some of which may be beyond our control, including:

These and other external factors may cause the market price and demand for our ordinary shares to fluctuate substantially, which may limit or prevent investors from readily selling their ordinary shares and may otherwise negatively affect the liquidity of our ordinary shares. In particular, stock markets in general have experienced volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of a particular company. These broad market fluctuations may adversely affect the trading price of our ordinary shares. Some companies that experienced volatility in the trading price of their stock have been the subject of securities class action litigation. If any of our shareholders brought a lawsuit against us, we could incur substantial costs defending the lawsuit. Such a lawsuit could also divert the time and attention of our management.

We are subject to the reporting and other obligations under the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including the requirements of Section 404 of the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which require annual management assessments of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. In addition, under Section 404(b) of the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act, if we are either an “accelerated filer” or “large accelerated filer,” our independent registered public accounting firm must attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. The rules governing the standards that must be met for management to assess our internal control over financial reporting are complex and require significant documentation, testing and possible remediation to meet the detailed standards under the rules. During the course of its testing, our management may identify material weaknesses or deficiencies which may not be remedied in time to meet the deadline imposed by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. These reporting and other obligations place significant demands on our management and administrative and operational resources, including accounting resources.

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Our internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of our financial statements for external purposes in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S. During the course of our review and testing of our internal controls, we have identified, and may identify in the future, deficiencies and may be unable to remediate them before we must provide the required reports. Furthermore, if we have a material weakness in our internal controls over financial reporting, we may not detect errors on a timely basis and our consolidated financial statements may be materially misstated. We, or our independent registered public accounting firm (if required), may not be able to conclude on an ongoing basis that we have effective internal control over financial reporting, which could harm our operating results, cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information and cause the trading price of our stock to fall.

Under current law, we are treated as a foreign corporation for U.S. federal tax purposes. However, changes to the U.S. Internal Revenue Code, U.S. Treasury Regulations or other IRS guidance thereunder could adversely affect our status as a foreign corporation or otherwise affect our effective tax rate. For example, in 2017 the United States enacted tax reform that contained significant changes to corporate taxation, including a provision that requires capitalization and amortization of research and development costs over five years for tax years beginning after December 31, 2021. In addition, the Irish Government, Irish Revenue, U.S. Congress, the IRS, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (“OECD”), and other governments and agencies in jurisdictions where we do business have recently focused on issues related to the taxation of multinational corporations, including the OECD’s Global Anti-Base Erosion Model Rules (Pillar Two), which apply a 15% global minimum tax rate on a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis to groups with turnover of not less than €750 million in at least two of the four prior fiscal years. Pillar Two has been implemented into Irish law with effect for periods beginning on or after December 31, 2023. As a result of Pillar Two or other policy changes, whether at national or supranational level, the tax laws in Ireland, the U.S., and other countries in which we do business could change on a prospective or retroactive basis, and any such changes could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and/or growth prospects.

It may not be possible to enforce court judgments obtained in the U.S. against us in Ireland based on the civil liability provisions of the U.S. federal or state securities laws. In addition, there is uncertainty as to whether the courts of Ireland would recognize or enforce judgments of U.S. courts obtained against us or our directors or officers based on the civil liabilities provisions of the U.S. federal or state securities laws or hear actions against us or those persons based on those laws. We have been advised that the U.S. currently does not have a treaty with Ireland providing for the reciprocal recognition and

As an Irish incorporated company, we are governed by the Irish Companies Act 2014, as amended (the “Companies Act”), which differs in some material respects from laws generally applicable to U.S. corporations and shareholders, including, among others, differences relating to interested director and officer transactions and shareholder lawsuits. Likewise, the duties of directors and officers of an Irish company generally are owed to the company only. Shareholders of Irish companies generally do not have a personal right of action against directors or officers of the company and may exercise such rights of action on behalf of the company only in limited circumstances. Accordingly, holders of our ordinary shares may have more difficulty protecting their interests than would holders of securities of a corporation incorporated in a jurisdiction of the U.S.

Under the Irish Takeover Panel Act, 1997, Takeover Rules, 2022 (the “Irish Takeover Rules”), if an acquisition of ordinary shares were to increase the aggregate holding of the acquirer and its concert parties to ordinary shares that represent 30% or more of the voting rights of the company, the acquirer and, in certain circumstances, its concert parties would be required (except with the consent of the Irish Takeover Panel) to make an offer for the outstanding ordinary shares at a price not less than the highest price paid for the ordinary shares by the acquirer or its concert parties during the previous 12 months. This requirement would also be triggered by an acquisition of ordinary shares by a person holding (together with its concert parties) ordinary shares that represent between 30% and 50% of the voting rights in the company if the effect of such acquisition were to increase that person’s percentage of the voting rights by 0.05% within a 12 month period. Under the Irish Takeover Rules, certain separate concert parties are presumed to be acting in concert. Our board of directors and their relevant family members, related trusts and “controlled companies” are presumed to be acting in concert with any corporate shareholder who holds 20% or more of our shares. The application of these presumptions may result in restrictions upon the ability of any of the concert parties and/or members of our board of directors to acquire more of our securities, including under the terms of any executive incentive arrangements. In the future, we may consult with the Irish Takeover Panel with respect to the application of this presumption and the restrictions on the ability to acquire further securities, although we are unable to provide any assurance as to whether the Irish Takeover Panel will overrule this presumption. Accordingly, the application of the Irish Takeover Rules may restrict the ability of certain of our shareholders and directors to acquire our ordinary shares.

We are subject to the Irish Takeover Rules, pursuant to which our Board is not permitted to take any action that might frustrate an offer for our ordinary shares once our Board has received an approach that may lead to an offer or has reason to believe that such an offer is or may be imminent, subject to certain exceptions. Potentially frustrating actions such as (i) the issue of ordinary shares, options or convertible securities, (ii) material acquisitions or disposals, (iii) entering into contracts other than in the ordinary course of business, or (iv) any action, other than seeking alternative offers, which may result in frustration of an offer, are prohibited during the course of an offer or at any earlier time during which our Board has reason to believe an offer is or may be imminent. These provisions may give our Board less ability to control negotiations with hostile offerors and protect the interests of holders of ordinary shares than would be the case for a corporation incorporated in a jurisdiction of the U.S.

As an Irish incorporated company, we are governed by the Companies Act. The Companies Act requires that every five years our shareholders renew the separate authorities of our Board to (a) allot and issue shares, and (b) opt out of the statutory pre-emption right that otherwise applies to share issuances for cash (which pre-emption right would require that shares issued for cash be offered to our existing shareholders on a pro rata basis before the shares may be issued to new shareholders). At our shareholders' annual general meeting held on May 17, 2022, our shareholders authorized our Board to issue ordinary shares up to the amount of our authorized share capital, and to opt out of the statutory pre-emption right for such issuances. Under Irish law, these authorizations will expire on May 17, 2027, five years after our shareholders last renewed these authorizations. Irish law requires that our shareholders renew the authority for our Board to issue ordinary shares by a resolution approved by not less than 50% of the votes cast at a general meeting of our shareholders. Irish law requires that our shareholders renew the authority of our Board to opt out of the statutory pre-emption right in share issuances for cash by a resolution approved by not less than 75% of the votes cast at a general meeting of our shareholders. If these authorizations are not renewed before May 17, 2027, or are renewed with limitations, our Board would be limited in its ability to issue shares, which would limit our ability to

Irish stamp duty may be payable in respect of transfers of our ordinary shares (currently at the rate of 1% of the price paid or the market value of the shares acquired, if greater).

Under the Irish Stamp Duties Consolidation Act, 1999 (the “Stamp Duties Act”), a transfer of our ordinary shares from a seller who holds shares through The Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) to a buyer who holds the acquired shares through DTC will not be subject to Irish stamp duty. Shareholders may also transfer their shares into or out of DTC without giving rise to Irish stamp duty provided that there is no change in the beneficial ownership of such shares and the transfer into or out of DTC is not effected in contemplation of a subsequent sale of such shares to a third party; in order to benefit from this exemption from Irish stamp duty, the seller must confirm to us that there is no change in the ultimate beneficial ownership of the shares as a result of the transfer and there is no agreement for the sale of the shares by the beneficial owner to a third party being contemplated.

A transfer of our ordinary shares (i) by a seller who holds shares outside of DTC to any buyer, or (ii) by a seller who holds the shares through DTC to a buyer who holds the acquired shares outside of DTC, may be subject to Irish stamp duty. Payment of any Irish stamp duty is generally a legal obligation of the transferee.

Any Irish stamp duty payable on transfers of our ordinary shares could adversely affect the price of those shares.

We anticipate losing money for the foreseeable future and, even if we do turn a profit, we do not anticipate declaring or paying any cash dividends for the foreseeable future. Therefore, the success of an investment in our ordinary shares will depend upon appreciation in their value and in order to receive any income or realize a return on your investment, you will need to sell your Prothena ordinary shares. There can be no assurance that our ordinary shares will maintain their price or appreciate in value.

Although we do not currently anticipate paying cash dividends, if we were to do so in the future, a dividend withholding tax (currently at a rate of 25%) may arise. A number of exemptions from dividend withholding tax exist such that shareholders resident in the U.S. and shareholders resident in other countries that have entered into a double taxation treaty with Ireland may be entitled to exemptions from dividend withholding tax subject to the completion of certain dividend withholding tax declaration forms.

Shareholders entitled to an exemption from Irish dividend withholding tax on any dividends received from us will not be subject to Irish income tax in respect of those dividends, unless they have some connection with Ireland other than their shareholding (for example, they are resident in Ireland). Non-Irish resident shareholders who receive dividends subject to Irish dividend withholding tax will generally have no further liability to Irish income tax on those dividends.

Irish capital acquisitions tax (“CAT”) could apply to a gift or inheritance of our ordinary shares irrespective of the place of residence, ordinary residence or domicile of the parties. This is because our ordinary shares will be regarded as property situated in Ireland. The person who receives the gift or inheritance has primary liability for CAT. Gifts and inheritances passing between spouses are exempt from CAT. It is recommended that each shareholder consult his or her own tax advisor as to the tax consequences of holding our ordinary shares or receiving dividends from us.

None.

ITEM 5. OTHER INFORMATION