MediWound (MDWD) 20-F2021 FY Annual report (foreign)

In this annual report, the terms “MediWound,” “we,” “us,” “our” and “the company” refer to MediWound Ltd. and its subsidiaries.

This annual report includes other statistical, market and industry data and forecasts which we obtained from publicly available information and independent industry publications and reports that we believe to be reliable sources. These publicly available industry publications and reports generally state that they obtain their information from sources that they believe to be reliable, but they do not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information. Although we believe that these sources are reliable, we have not independently verified the information contained in such publications. Certain estimates and forecasts involve uncertainties and risks and are subject to change based on various factors, including those discussed under the headings “Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” and “ITEM 3.D. Risk Factors” in this annual report.

Throughout this annual report, we refer to various trademarks, service marks and trade names that we use in our business. The “MediWound” design logo, “MediWound,” “NexoBrid,” “EscharEx” and other trademarks or service marks of MediWound Ltd. appearing in this annual report are the property of MediWound Ltd. We have several other trademarks, service marks and pending applications relating to our solutions. Other trademarks and service marks appearing in this annual report are the property of their respective holders.

In addition to historical facts, this annual report on Form 20-F contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), Section 21E of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) and the safe harbor provisions of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. We make forward-looking statements in this annual report that are subject to risks and uncertainties. These forward-looking statements include information about possible or assumed future results of our business, financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, plans and objectives. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as “believe,” “may,” “estimate,” “continue,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “should,” “plan,” “expect,” “predict,” “potential,” or the negative of these terms or other similar expressions. The statements we make regarding the following matters are forward-looking by their nature:

The preceding list is not intended to be an exhaustive list of all of our forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements are based on our beliefs, assumptions and expectations of future performance, taking into account the information currently available to us. These statements are only predictions based upon our current expectations and projections about future events. These statements may be found in the sections of this annual report on Form 20-F entitled “ITEM 3.D. Risk Factors,” “ITEM 4. Information on the Company,” “ITEM 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects,” “ITEM 10.E. Taxation—United States Federal Income Taxation—Passive Foreign Investment Company Considerations” and elsewhere in this annual report, including the section entitled “ITEM 4.B. Business Overview” and “ITEM 4.B. Business Overview—Our Focus,” which contain information obtained from independent industry sources. Actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements due to various important factors, including all the risks discussed in “ITEM 3.D. Risk Factors” and information contained in other documents filed with or furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission. 

You should not rely upon forward-looking statements as predictions of future events. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee that future results, levels of activity, performance and events and circumstances reflected in the forward-looking statements will be achieved or will occur. Except as required by law, we undertake no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements for any reason after the date of this annual report to conform these statements to actual results or to changes in our expectations. 

We intend to develop and commercialize pipeline product candidates based on our patented enzymatic technology platform for marketing authorization of NexoBrid and EscharEx in the U.S. and other indications. However, before obtaining regulatory approval for the sale of our pipeline product candidates in any jurisdiction, we must conduct, at our own expense, clinical studies to demonstrate that the products are safe and effective.

Preclinical and clinical testing is expensive, is difficult to design and implement, can take many years to complete and is uncertain as to outcome. A failure of one or more of our clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing. We may experience numerous unforeseen events during, or as a result of, preclinical testing and the clinical trial process. Even if preclinical or clinical trials are successful, we still may be unable to commercialize the product, as success in preclinical trials, clinical trials or previous clinical trials does not ensure that later clinical trials will be successful.

A number of events could delay or prevent our ability to complete necessary clinical trials for our pipeline product candidates, including:

Moreover, we do not know whether preclinical tests or clinical trials will begin or be completed as planned or will need to be restructured. Significant delays could also shorten the patent protection period during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our pipeline product candidates or could allow our competitors to bring products to the market before we do, impairing our ability to commercialize our pipeline product candidates.

In the short term, we have been relying, for a significant portion of our revenues from sales of products, on sales of NexoBrid in Europe and in other international markets for the treatment of severe burns and procurement of NexoBrid by the U.S. Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) for emergency stockpile as part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) mission to build national preparedness for public health medical emergencies.  However, our continued growth depends, in large part, on our ability to develop and obtain marketing authorization for NexoBrid for treatment of severe burns in additional markets, especially in the United States (from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)). We expect that marketing approval from the FDA, if granted, would enable us to receive additional payments, including milestone payments, transfer price payments and royalties, from Vericel Corporation ("Vericel"), our U.S. commercial partner, who is responsible for commercializing NexoBrid in the North America. In September 2020, the FDA accepted for review our Biologics License Application (“BLA”), which was based on acute data, including primary, secondary and safety endpoints, as well as 12-month safety follow-up data derived from our Phase 3 pivotal study.   In June 2021, we received a Complete Response letter from the FDA stating that our BLA was not approved. We had a Type A meeting with the FDA in October 2021 to discuss a path forward for resubmission, in which we gained clarity on a path forward for resubmission of the BLA, and we plan to resubmit our BLA for NexoBrid in mid-2022. We cannot predict how long the FDA may take to review and approve NexoBrid following our planned BLA resubmission, or whether any such approval in the United States will ultimately be granted. For example, if the FDA requests additional information as a part of its review of the BLA for NexoBrid, there is no guarantee that FDA will consider our responses to be sufficient or timely to enable FDA approval by any subsequent PDUFA goal date, particularly in light of delays in the FDA’s review caused or exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic, including delays in conducting required inspections of our manufacturing facilities. Similarly, we cannot predict how long regulatory authorities outside of the United States and Europe may take to provide NexoBrid with marketing authorization in their jurisdictions or whether such authorizations will be granted at all. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials, even after obtaining promising results in earlier clinical trials. See “—Product development is a lengthy and expensive process, with an uncertain outcome” and “—Development and commercialization of NexoBrid and EscharEx in the United States and our pipeline product candidates worldwide requires successful completion of the regulatory approval process, and may suffer delays or fail.” The failure to receive such marketing authorization, especially in the United States, would have a material adverse impact on our business prospects.

In the United States, as well as other jurisdictions, we are required to apply for and receive marketing authorization before we can market our products, as we have already received for NexoBrid in the European Union and other international markets. This process can be time-consuming and complicated and may result in unanticipated delays. To secure marketing authorization, an applicant generally is required to submit an application that includes the data supporting preclinical and clinical safety and efficacy as well as detailed information on the manufacturing and control of the product, proposed labeling and other information. Before marketing authorization is granted, regulatory authorities generally require the inspection of the manufacturing facility or facilities and quality systems (including those of third parties) at which the product candidate is manufactured and tested, to assess compliance with strictly enforced current good manufacturing practices (“cGMP”) and similar foreign requirements such as Good Manufacturing Practices (“GMP”) in the European Union, as well as potential audits of the non-clinical and clinical trial sites that generated the data cited in the marketing authorization application to assess compliance with requisite good clinical practices (“GCP”).

We cannot predict how long the applicable regulatory authority or agency will take to grant marketing authorization or whether any such authorizations will ultimately be granted. Regulatory agencies, including the FDA and the European Medicines Agency (the “EMA”), have substantial discretion in the approval process, and the approval process and the requirements governing clinical trials vary from country to country. The policies of the FDA, the EMA or other regulatory authorities may change or may not be explicit, and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of NexoBrid, EscharEx or our pipeline product candidates. For instance, the regulatory landscape related to clinical trials in the European Union (“EU”) recently evolved. The EU Clinical Trials Regulation (“CTR”) which was adopted in April 2014 and repeals the EU Clinical Trials Directive, became applicable on January 31, 2022. While the Clinical Trials Directive required a separate clinical trial application (“CTA”) to be submitted in each member state, to both the competent national health authority and an independent ethics committee, the CTR introduces a centralized process and only requires the submission of a single application to all member states concerned. The CTR allows sponsors to make a single submission to both the competent authority and an ethics committee in each member state, leading to a single decision per member state. The assessment procedure of the CTA has been harmonized as well, including a joint assessment by all member states concerned, and a separate assessment by each member state with respect to specific requirements related to its own territory, including ethics rules. Each member state’s decision is communicated to the sponsor via the centralized EU portal. Once the CTA is approved, clinical study development may proceed. The CTR foresees a three-year transition period. The extent to which ongoing and new clinical trials will be governed by the CTR varies. For clinical trials whose CTA was made under the Clinical Trials Directive before January 31, 2022, the Clinical Trials Directive will continue to apply on a transitional basis for three years. Additionally, sponsors may still choose to submit a CTA under either the Clinical Trials Directive or the CTR until January 31, 2023 and, if authorized, those will be governed by the Clinical Trials Directive until January 31, 2025. By that date, all ongoing trials will become subject to the provisions of the CTR. Additionally, the EU pharmaceutical legislation is currently undergoing a complete review process, in the context of the Pharmaceutical Strategy for Europe initiative, launched by the European Commission in November 2020. A proposal for revision of several legislative instruments related to medicinal products (potentially revising the duration of regulatory exclusivity, eligibility for expedited pathways, etc.) is expected to be adopted by the European Commission by the end of 2022. The proposed revisions, once they are agreed and adopted by the European Parliament and European Council (not expected before the end of 2024) may have a significant impact on the biopharmaceutical industry in the long term. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability. We also cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative or executive action, either in the United States or abroad. If such actions impose constraints on the FDA’s ability to engage in oversight and implementation activities in the normal course, or 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 unable to maintain regulatory compliance, we may be subject to enforcement action and our business may be negatively impacted.

In addition, any regulatory approval that we will receive may also contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing, including Phase 4 clinical trials, and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate. For example, as part of the EMA regulatory approval process, we agreed to provide further data from a post-marketing Phase 3 clinical trial of NexoBrid. We believe that our U.S. Phase 3 study will also serve to address this post-marketing commitment to EMA. If EMA is not satisfied with the study results, we will need to perform another costly study to provide such data. Once a product is approved, the manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion, import, export and recordkeeping for the product will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. These requirements include submission of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration and continued compliance with cGMP and similar foreign requirements and GCP for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval. Although our manufacturing facility is cGMP-certified, we may face difficulties in obtaining regulatory approval for the manufacturing and quality control process of our pipeline product candidates.

The ability of FDA and foreign regulatory authorities to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, statutory, regulatory, and policy changes, FDA’s and foreign regulatory authorities’ ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and other events that may otherwise affect FDA’s and foreign regulatory authorities’ ability to perform routine functions. Average review times at the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable. Disruptions at FDA and other agencies such as the EMA, following its relocation to Amsterdam and resulting staff changes, may also slow the time necessary for new drugs and biologics to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary regulatory authorities, which would adversely affect our business.  For example, over the last several years, including for 35 days beginning on December 22, 2018, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as FDA, have had to furlough critical FDA employees and stop critical activities.

Separately, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, on March 10, 2020 FDA announced its intention to postpone most inspections of foreign manufacturing facilities, and on March 18, 2020, FDA temporarily postponed routine surveillance inspections of domestic manufacturing facilities. Subsequently, on July 10, 2020 FDA announced its intention to resume certain on-site inspections of domestic manufacturing facilities subject to a risk-based prioritization system. The FDA utilized this risk-based assessment system to assist in determining when and where it was safest to conduct prioritized domestic inspections. Additionally, on April 15, 2021, the FDA issued a guidance document in which the FDA described its plans to conduct voluntary remote interactive evaluations of certain drug manufacturing facilities and clinical research sites, among other facilities. According to the guidance, the FDA may request such remote interactive evaluations where the FDA determines that remote evaluation would be appropriate based on mission needs and travel limitations. In May 2021, the FDA outlined a detailed plan to move toward a more consistent state of inspectional operations, and in July 2021, the FDA resumed standard inspectional operations of domestic facilities and was continuing to maintain this level of operation as of September 2021. More recently, the FDA has continued to monitor and implement changes to its inspectional activities to ensure the safety of its employees and those of the firms it regulates as it adapts to the evolving COVID-19 pandemic. Regulatory authorities outside the United States have adopted similar restrictions or other policy measures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, or if global health concerns continue to prevent FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of FDA or other regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

NexoBrid, EscharEx and all of our current pipeline product candidates rely on our patented enzymatic platform technology, although their specific formulations or mode of applications may vary. Like most pharmaceutical products, our approval labels for NexoBrid in Europe and other international markets list certain side effects. If we or others identify previously unknown problems with NexoBrid, EscharEx or their underlying proteolytic enzymes, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, problems with our manufacturers or manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, the following consequences, among others, may result, including, without limitation:

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of NexoBrid, our pipeline product candidates or future product candidates, which would adversely affect our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

The marketing approval for NexoBrid in the European Union and other international markets is limited to the treatment of deep partial- and full-thickness burns in adults. In addition, any additional regulatory approval of NexoBrid for severe burns and any regulatory approval we may receive for any of our pipeline product candidates in the future, would be limited to those specific indications for which such pipeline product candidate had been deemed safe and effective by the EMA, the FDA or another regulatory authority and, like the European Commission marketing approval for NexoBrid, would be subject to a renewal examination five years after the extended marketing approval, which will take place during 2022. Additionally, labeling restrictions in EU limit the manner in which a product may be used. For example, NexoBrid’s label provides that it may only be used in specialized burns centers or by burn specialists and that it is not to be applied to more than 15% of the patient’s total body surface area. If physicians prescribe the medication for unapproved, or “off-label,” uses or in a manner that is inconsistent with the manufacturer’s labeling, it could produce results such as reduced efficacy or other adverse effects, and the reputation of our products in the marketplace may suffer. In addition, should any of our future products have a significant price difference and if they are used interchangeably, off-label uses may cause a decline in our revenues or potential revenues. Furthermore, while physicians may choose to prescribe treatments for uses that are not described in the product’s labeling and for uses that differ from those approved by regulatory authorities, we cannot promote the products for any indications other than those that are specifically approved by the European Commission, the FDA or other regulatory authorities. Regulatory authorities restrict communications by companies on the subject of off-label use. If our promotional activities fail to comply with these regulations or guidelines, we may be subject to enforcement actions by those authorities. In the United States, “off-label promotion” by pharmaceutical companies has resulted in significant litigation under the Federal False Claims Act, violations of which may result in substantial civil penalties and fines as well as exclusion from government health care programs. More generally, failure to follow the rules and guidelines of regulatory agencies relating to promotion and advertising, such as that promotional materials not be false or misleading, can result in refusal to approve a product, the suspension or withdrawal of an approved product from the market, product recalls, fines, disgorgement of money, operating restrictions, injunctions or criminal prosecution.

In the U.S., the FDA may designate a drug as an orphan drug if it is a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 in the United States where there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in the United States. Orphan drug designation in the U.S. entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax credits for certain clinical trial costs and user-fee waivers.

Similarly, in the EU, the European Commission grants orphan designation after receiving the opinion of the EMA Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products on an application for orphan designation. A medicinal product may be designated as orphan if its sponsor can establish that (i) the product is intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition; (ii) either (a) such condition affects no more than 5 in 10,000 persons in the EU when the application is made, or (b) the product, without the benefits derived from orphan status, would not generate sufficient return in the EU to justify investment; and (iii) there exists no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment of such condition authorized for marketing in the EU, or if such a method exists, the medicinal product will be of significant benefit to those affected by the condition. Orphan designation in the EU entitles a party to a number of incentives, such as protocol assistance and scientific advice specifically for designated orphan medicines, and potential fee reductions depending on the status of the sponsor.

Although NexoBrid has been designated an orphan drug in the United States, EU and South Korea, Mexico, Japan, UK and Switzerland, there is no guarantee that we will obtain approval or orphan drug exclusivity in the United States or other jurisdictions, or maintain such exclusivity in Europe. Generally, if a drug with an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first marketing approval for the disease or condition for which it has such designation, the drug is entitled to a period of marketing exclusivity, which precludes the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities from approving another marketing application, granting a marketing authorization, or accepting an application to extend a marketing authorization for the same drug and disease or condition for that time period, except in limited circumstances. The applicable period is seven years in the United States and ten years in the EU. In the EU, the ten-year market exclusivity may be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, it is established that the product no longer meets the criteria for which it received orphan designation, including where it is shown that the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity, or where the prevalence of the condition has increased above the threshold. Additionally granting of an authorization for another similar orphan medicinal product where another product has market exclusivity can happen at any time: (i) the second applicant can establish that its product, although similar, is safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior; (ii) the applicant cannot supply enough orphan medicinal product or (iii) where the applicant consents to a second orphan medicinal product application.

While the marketing exclusivity of an orphan drug prevents other sponsors from obtaining approval of a similar drug for the same disease or condition (unless the sponsor demonstrates clinical superiority or a market shortage occurs), it would not prevent other sponsors from obtaining approval of the same compound for other diseases or conditions, or obtaining approval of a different compound for the same indications as the orphan product. In addition, the FDA or the EMA may revisit any orphan drug designation and retains the ability to withdraw the designation at any time.

To obtain FDA approval for our product candidates, we may obtain clinical data from trials in healthy human subjects that demonstrate adequate safety, and efficacy data from adequate and well-controlled animal studies under regulations issued by the FDA in 2002, often referred to as the “Animal Rule.”  Among other requirements, the animal studies must establish that the drug or biological product is reasonably likely to produce clinical benefits in humans. If we use this approach we may not be able to sufficiently demonstrate this correlation to the satisfaction of the FDA, as these corollaries are difficult to establish and are often unclear.  Because the FDA must agree that data derived from animal studies may be extrapolated to establish safety and effectiveness in humans, seeking approval under the Animal Rule may add significant time, complexity and uncertainty to the testing and approval process. The FDA may decide that our data are insufficient for approval and require additional preclinical, clinical or other studies, refuse to approve our product candidates, or place restrictions on our ability to commercialize the products.  In addition, products approved under the Animal Rule are subject to additional requirements, including post-marketing study requirements, restrictions imposed on marketing or distribution, or requirements to provide information to patients. Further, regulatory authorities in other countries may not have established an “Animal Rule” equivalent, and, consequently, there can be no assurance that we will be able to make a submission for marketing approval in foreign countries based on such animal data

We currently rely on a single manufacturing facility in Yavne, Israel, and we expect that all of our revenues in the near future will be derived from products manufactured at this facility. If this facility were to suffer an accident or a force majeure event such as war, missile or terrorist attack, earthquake, major fire or explosion, major equipment failure or power failure lasting beyond the capabilities of our backup generators or similar event, our revenues would be materially adversely affected and any of our clinical trials could be materially delayed. In this situation, our manufacturing capacity could be shut down for an extended period, we could experience a loss of raw materials, work in process or finished goods inventory and our ability to operate our business would be harmed. In addition, in any such event, the reconstruction of our manufacturing facility and storage facilities, and obtaining regulatory approval for the new facilities could be time-consuming. During this period, we would be unable to manufacture NexoBrid or our pipeline product candidates. In addition, we currently have limited inventory of NexoBrid that we can supply to our customers in the event that we are unable to further manufacture NexoBrid.

Moreover, our business insurance does not cover losses that may occur as a result of events associated with the security situation in the Middle East. Although the Israeli government currently covers the reinstatement value of direct damages that are caused by terrorist attacks or acts of war, we cannot assure you that this government coverage will be maintained, or if maintained, will be sufficient to compensate us fully for damages incurred. Any losses or damages incurred by us could have a material adverse effect on our business.

The process of manufacturing NexoBrid, EscharEx and our pipeline product candidates is complex, highly regulated and subject to the risk of product loss due to contamination, equipment failure or improper installation or operation of equipment, or vendor or operator error. Even minor deviations from normal manufacturing processes or quality requirements for our products could result in reduced production yields, product defects and other supply disruptions. If microbial, viral or other contaminations are discovered in NexoBrid or our pipeline product candidates or in the manufacturing facilities in which NexoBrid or our pipeline product candidates are or will be made, such manufacturing facilities may need to be closed to investigate and remedy the contamination.

Aside from the significant COVID-19 impact, we may experience any contaminations, major equipment failures, or other similar manufacturing problems of such magnitude, any adverse developments affecting manufacturing operations for NexoBrid or our pipeline product candidates which may result in additional shipment delays, inventory shortages, lot failures, withdrawals or recalls, or other interruptions in the supply of NexoBrid or our pipeline product candidates. We may also have to take inventory write-offs and incur other charges and expenses for our products that fail to meet specifications, undertake costly remediation efforts, or seek costlier manufacturing alternatives.

The manufacturing processes for our products are governed by detailed cGMP and similar foreign regulations, both for our marketed products in the EU and product candidates in clinical testing in the U.S., EU and Israel. Failure by our manufacturing and quality operations unit to adhere to established regulations or to meet a specification or procedure set forth in cGMP and similar foreign requirements could require that a product or material be rejected and destroyed. Our adherence to cGMP and similar foreign regulations and the effectiveness of our quality control systems are periodically assessed through inspections of our manufacturing facility by regulatory authorities. Such inspections could result in deficiency citations, which would require us to take action to correct those deficiencies to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authorities. If critical deficiencies are noted or if we are unable to prevent recurrences, we may have to recall products or suspend operations until appropriate measures can be implemented. Since cGMP and similar foreign regulations reflect ever-evolving standards, we need to regularly update our manufacturing processes and procedures to comply with cGMP and similar foreign regulations. These changes may cause us to incur additional costs and may adversely impact our profitability. For example, more sensitive testing assays (if and when they become available, or due to the discontinuation of the availability of the disposables currently used in production) may be required, or existing procedures or processes may require revalidation, all of which may be costly and time-consuming and could delay or prevent the manufacturing of NexoBrid or launch of a new product.

We are currently seeking to expand our manufacturing capabilities in order to increase our capacity to manufacture NexoBrid and future product candidates and satisfy near term demand. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to obtain the requisite approvals, including meeting regulatory and quality requirements, or the necessary capital resources for procuring this facility, or if we do, that the facility will satisfy additional growing demand. Conversely, there can be no assurance that even if we obtain a new facility, demand for our products will increase proportionately to the increased production capability. Furthermore, we cannot assure that this or similar projects will be implemented in a timely and cost efficient manner, and that our current production will not be adversely affected by the operational challenges of implementing the expansion project.

We currently procure bromelain SP, substance key starting material in the manufacturing of NexoBrid, EscharEx and our pipeline product candidates, from a single supplier, Challenge Bioproducts Corporation Ltd. (“CBC”). CBC’s manufacturing facilities are located in the Republic of China and it uses proprietary methods to manufacture bromelain SP. Our supply agreement with CBC has no fixed expiration date and can be voluntarily terminated by us, with at least six months’ advance written notice, or by CBC, with at least 24 months’ advance written notice. Although we have a contractual right to procure this material from other suppliers, subject to payment of a one-time, non-material licensing fee to CBC, procuring this material from any other source would require time and effort which may interrupt our supply of bromelain SP and may cause an interruption of the supply of NexoBrid, EscharEx and our pipeline product candidates to the marketplace and for future clinical trials or other development purposes. Regulatory authorities could require that we conduct additional studies in support of a new supplier, which could result in significant additional costs or delays. Furthermore, there can be no assurance that we would be able to procure alternative supplies of bromelain SP at all or at comparable quality or competitive prices or upon fair and reasonable contractual terms and conditions. Although we believe that we currently store sufficient inventory of bromelain SP in our warehouse and CBC warehouse to continue full capacity operations for approximately two years, this inventory may prove insufficient, and any interruption or failure to source additional bromelain SP from CBC or other third parties in a timely manner, or at all, would adversely affect our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, if CBC experiences any closures and labor shortages as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, we may face difficulty sourcing bromelain SP, which could negatively affect our revenues.

We currently have a marketing approval for a single product, NexoBrid, a concentrate of proteolytic enzymes enriched in bromelain, based on our patented enzymatic platform technology, which has been approved for marketing in the EU as well as the European Economic Area (“EEA”) (which consists of the 27 EU member states plus Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland), U.K., Israel, Argentina, Russia, Ukraine, South Korea, Peru, Chile, Taiwan, United Arab Emirates and Eurasian countries for the treatment of adults with deep partial- and full-thickness burns, which we refer to as severe burns. We are currently relying, for a significant portion of our revenues from sales of products, on sales of NexoBrid in Europe and in other international markets for the treatment of severe burns and procurement of NexoBrid by BARDA. In November 2017, the European Commission re-granted a five-year renewal of our NexoBrid marketing authorization and we plan to file for renewal during 2022. We anticipate that, for at least the next several years, our ability to generate revenues and become profitable will depend on the commercial success of NexoBrid in these markets, BARDA’s procurement as well as successful launch in new markets such as U.S. following obtaining marketing approval.

NexoBrid, EscharEx and our pipeline product candidates may not gain market acceptance by physicians and their teams, healthcare payors, patients and others in the medical community. Although many physicians in burn centers throughout Europe, the United States and other international markets have used NexoBrid for severe burns as part of our clinical trials or since NexoBrid’s commercial launch in Europe, Israel, Argentina, South Korea and Russia, we cannot guarantee that use of NexoBrid will be accepted in the market. We need to successfully integrate NexoBrid into the overall treatment of burns in burn centers. If NexoBrid, EscharEx and our pipeline product candidates do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance, we may not generate revenue and we may not achieve or sustain profitability. The degree of market acceptance of NexoBrid in Europe and in other international countries where we receive marketing approval, and of EscharEx and our pipeline product candidates, will depend on a number of factors, some of which are beyond our control, including:

Failure to achieve market acceptance for NexoBrid, EscharEx or any of our pipeline product candidates, if and when they are approved for commercial sale, will have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

While we are executing a country-specific market access strategy, which includes pricing and/or reimbursement targets for NexoBrid in most of Europe, we cannot guarantee that we will receive favorable hospital, regional or national funding or pricing and reimbursement. Additionally, we cannot predict the pricing and reimbursement of NexoBrid, EscharEx or our pipeline product candidates. The regulations that govern marketing approvals, pricing and reimbursement for new products vary widely from country to country, among regions within some countries and among some hospitals. In some foreign jurisdictions, including the European Union, the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject to governmental control. In other countries, coverage negotiations must occur at the regional or hospital level in order to be included in the hospital formulary. Pricing negotiations with governmental authorities at the regional or hospital level can take considerable time after the receipt of marketing approval for a product candidate.

As a result, even after obtaining regulatory approval for a product in a particular country, we may be subject to price regulations or denied or limited by reimbursement or formulary inclusion, which may delay or limit our commercial launch of the product and negatively impact the revenue we are able to generate from the sale of the product in that country. Adverse pricing limitations may hinder our ability to recoup our investment in NexoBrid, EscharEx or our pipeline product candidates, even after obtaining regulatory approval.

Additionally, we cannot be sure that coverage and reimbursement will be available for NexoBrid, EscharEx or any pipeline product candidate that we commercialize in the future, and, if reimbursement is available, whether the level of reimbursement will be adequate. Coverage and reimbursement may affect the demand for, the price of, or the budget allocated for reimbursement for any product for which we obtain marketing approval. Obtaining coverage and adequate reimbursement for our products may be particularly difficult because of the higher prices often associated with products administered under the supervision of a physician. If coverage and reimbursement are not available or are available only at limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize NexoBrid, EscharEx or any pipeline product candidate that we successfully develop. Eligibility for reimbursement does not guarantee that any product will be paid for in all cases or at a rate that covers our costs. Interim payments for new products, if applicable, may also not be sufficient to cover our costs and may not be made permanent. Payment rates may vary according to the use of the product and the clinical setting in which it is used, may be based on payments allowed for lower cost products that are already reimbursed and may be incorporated into existing payments for other services. Net prices for products may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payors and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of products from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in certain other countries, such as the United States. In the United States, third-party payors often rely on the coverage policies and payment limitations imposed by Medicare and other government payors, in setting their own coverage policies and reimbursement rates. Our inability to promptly obtain coverage and profitable payment rates from hospital budget, government-funded and private payors for NexoBrid, EscharEx or any pipeline product candidate could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, our ability to raise capital needed to commercialize products and our overall financial condition.

The United States and several other jurisdictions are considering, or have already enacted, a number of legislative and regulatory proposals to change the healthcare system in ways that may affect our ability to sell NexoBrid, EscharEx or any of our pipeline product candidates profitably, if approved. We cannot predict the initiatives that may be adopted in the future. The continuing efforts of hospitals, governments, insurance companies, managed care organizations and other payors of healthcare services to contain or reduce costs of healthcare may adversely affect:

Among policy makers and payors in the United States and elsewhere, there is significant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare costs, improving quality and/or expanding access. In the United States, the pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives. In March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or collectively, the Affordable Care Act, or ACA, was signed into law and intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for the healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms.

Among the provisions of the ACA of importance to our potential product candidates are the following:

 Since its enactment, there have been judicial, executive and congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. On June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the most recent judicial challenge to the ACA brought by several states without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA. Thus, the ACA will remain in effect in its current form. Further, prior to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, President Biden issued an executive order that initiated a special enrollment period for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the ACA marketplace from February 15, 2021 through August 15, 2021. The executive order instructed certain governmental agencies to review and reconsider their existing policies and rules that limit access to healthcare, including among others, reexamining Medicaid demonstration projects and waiver programs that include work requirements, and policies that create unnecessary barriers to obtaining access to health insurance coverage through Medicaid or the ACA.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. These changes included aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect in April 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments, will stay in effect through 2030, with the exception of a temporary suspension from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2022, unless additional Congressional action is taken. In January 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several providers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. These laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, which could negatively impact the market for NexoBrid and our other product candidates, if approved, and, accordingly, our financial operations.

There has been heightened governmental scrutiny recently over the manner in which drug manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which have resulted in several Congressional inquiries and proposed bills designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. The likelihood of implementation of any of these reform initiatives is uncertain, particularly in light of the new incoming Presidential administration. At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.

We expect that other possible healthcare reform measures may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, more rigorous coverage criteria, new payment methodologies and additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability, or commercialize our drugs.

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

The medical, biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are intensely competitive and subject to significant technological and practice changes. We may face competition from many different sources with respect to NexoBrid, our pipeline product candidates or any product candidates that we may seek to develop or commercialize in the future. Possible competitors may be medical practitioners, pharmaceutical and wound care companies, academic and medical institutions, governmental agencies and public and private research institutions, among others. Should any competitor’s product candidates receive regulatory or marketing approval prior to ours, they may establish a strong market position and be difficult to displace, or may diminish the need for our products.

Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products, treatments or procedures that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient or are less expensive than any product that we may develop. In addition, we face competition from the current standard of care for eschar removal in severe burns, which includes surgery, where eschar removal can occur by tangential excision, dermabrasion or hydro jet, and non-surgical alternatives, such as topical medications applied to the eschar to facilitate the natural healing process. In chronic and other hard-to-heal wounds, we expect to face competition from current standard of care for debridement via sharp debridement or from the current non-surgical standard of care, either enzymatic debridement, primarily Smith & Nephew Plc’s Santyl, a collagenase-based product indicated for debriding chronic dermal ulcers and severely burned areas, or autolytic debridement.

Many of our current or future competitors may have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals and marketing approved products than we may have. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries or wound care markets may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. For example, Healthpoint Biotherapeutics, which marketed Santyl, was acquired by Smith & Nephew Plc in 2012. Smaller and other early stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These companies compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel, establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs

We have a contract with BARDA, valued at up to $168 million, for the advancement of the development and manufacturing, as well as the procurement, of NexoBrid in the United States (the “First BARDA Contract”). Under the First BARDA Contract, BARDA has agreed to fund $91 million of the development costs of NexoBrid required to obtain marketing approval in the United States and the emergency readiness for NexoBrid deployment.  Under the First BARDA Contract, BARDA is procuring from us emergency stockpile of NexoBrid valued at $16.5 million as part of the HHS mission to build national preparedness for public health medical emergencies. The First BARDA Contract also includes options for BARDA (i) to further fund $10 million in development activities for other potential NexoBrid indications, and (ii) to further fund $50 million for additional procurement of NexoBrid.  As of December 31, 2021, the Company has received from BARDA approximately $70 million in the aggregate, under the two contracts, and an additional $14.6 million for procurement of NexoBrid for U.S. emergency preparedness.

We have incurred significant net losses, including a net loss of $9.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2020 and $13.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2021. As of December 31, 2021, we had an accumulated deficit of $148.5 million. We expect to incur substantial net losses for the foreseeable future. These losses and negative cash flows have had, and will continue to have, an adverse effect on our shareholder's equity and working capital.

We anticipate that our expenses and future capital requirements may increase if and as we:

We may seek additional funding in the future, which may consist of equity offerings, collaborations, licensing arrangements or any other means to develop our pipeline product candidates, increase our commercial manufacturing capabilities, operate our sales and marketing capabilities or other general corporate purposes. Under our shelf registration statement on Form F-3, we may offer from time to time up to $125 million in the aggregate of our ordinary shares, warrants and/or debt securities in one or more series or issuances.  In February 2020, we entered into an Open Market Sales Agreement with Jefferies LLC to issue and sell our ordinary shares with gross sales proceeds of up to $15 million, from time to time, through an at the market offering under which Jefferies LLC will act as our sales agent. As of the date hereof, we have not issued or sold any ordinary shares pursuant to the Open Market Sales Agreement.  Our prior registered equity offerings diluted then-existing shareholders, and to the extent that we raise additional capital through, for example, the sale of equity or convertible debt securities under our shelf registration statement, our existing shareholders’ ownership interest will be further diluted, and the terms may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect our shareholders’ rights. The incurrence of indebtedness or the issuance of certain equity securities could result in increased fixed payment obligations and could also result in certain restrictive covenants, such as limitations on our ability to incur additional debt or to issue additional equity, limitations on our ability to acquire or license intellectual property rights and other operating restrictions that could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business. In addition, the issuance of additional equity securities by us, or the possibility of such issuance, may cause the market price of our ordinary shares to decline. Securing additional financing may also divert our management’s attention from our day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize NexoBrid, EscharEx and our pipeline product candidates.

Additional funding may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. In the event that we enter into collaborations or licensing arrangements in order to raise capital, we may be required to accept unfavorable terms, including relinquishing or licensing to a third party on unfavorable terms our rights to product candidates or intellectual property that we otherwise would seek to develop or commercialize ourselves or reserve for future potential arrangements when we might be able to achieve more favorable terms.

If we are unable to raise additional capital when required or on acceptable terms, we may be required to:

Our future financial performance and ability to successfully commercialize our products and to compete effectively will depend, in part, on our ability to manage any future growth effectively. We have made and expect to continue to make significant investments to enable our future growth through, among other things, new product development, clinical trials for new indications, expansion of our marketing and sales infrastructure and continues exploring for potential business development opportunities. While we believe that our current manufacturing capacity is sufficient to meet the expected near-term commercial demand for NexoBrid, we are planning to scale-up the current capacity, subject to BLA approval, in 2023. We expect the cost will be approximately $8-10 million. We must also be prepared to expand our work force and train, motivate and manage additional employees as the need for additional personnel arises. Even following expansion, our facilities, personnel, systems, procedures and controls may not be adequate to support our future operations, or we may expand, but then fail to grow our sales of NexoBrid or our pipeline product candidates sufficiently to support such operational growth. Any failure to manage future growth effectively could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Our market estimates are based on many assumptions, including, but not limited to, reliance on external market research, our own internal research, population estimates, estimates of disease diagnostic rates, treatment trends, and market estimates by third parties. Any of these assumptions can materially impact our forecasts and we cannot be assured that the assumptions are accurate. If the market for any of our products or product candidates is less than this data would suggest, the potential sales for the product or pipeline product candidates in question could be adversely affected, and our inventories and net losses could increase.

Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with biopharmaceutical product development and commercialization, we are unable to accurately predict the timing or amount of future expenses or when, or if, we will be able to achieve or maintain profitability. We have financed our operations primarily through the sale of equity securities, licensing agreements and government grants. The size of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of growth or contraction of our expenses and the level and rate of growth, if any, of our revenues. If we are unable to successfully commercialize NexoBrid, EscharEx or one or more of our pipeline product candidates or if revenue from NexoBrid, EscharEx or any pipeline product candidate that receives marketing approval is insufficient, we will not achieve profitability. Even if we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability.

The dollar is our functional and reporting currency. However, a significant portion of our operating expenses are incurred in Israeli shekels and Euros. As a result, we are exposed to the risks that the shekel may appreciate relative to the dollar, or, if the shekel instead devalues relative to the dollar, that the inflation rate in Israel may exceed such rate of devaluation of the shekel, or that the timing of such devaluation may lag behind inflation in Israel. In any such event, the dollar cost of our operations in Israel would increase and our dollar-denominated results of operations would be adversely affected. We cannot predict any future trends in the rate of inflation in Israel or the rate of devaluation (if any) of the shekel against the dollar. For example, the shekel appreciated relative to the dollar by 3.3%, 7.0% and 7.8% in 2021, 2020 and 2019, respectively. If the dollar or Euro cost of our operations in Israel increases, our dollar- and Euro-measured results of operations will be adversely affected. Our operations also could be adversely affected if we are unable to effectively hedge against currency fluctuations in the future.

To the extent that we may receive revenues from sales in certain countries, such as certain countries in the Asia Pacific region, where our sales are expected to be denominated in dollars, a strengthening of the dollar in relation to other currencies could make our products less competitive in those foreign markets and collection of receivables more difficult. For further information, see “ITEM 11. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk” elsewhere in this annual report.

The laws governing our conduct in the United States and in foreign jurisdictions are enforceable by criminal, civil and administrative penalties. In the United States, violations of laws such as the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (the “FDCA”), the Public Health Service Act, the Federal False Claims Act, provisions of the U.S. Social Security Act, including the “Anti-Kickback Statute,” or any regulations promulgated under their authority, may result in significant administrative, civil and criminal sanctions, jail sentences, fines or exclusion from federal and state programs, as may be determined by the U.S. Department of Justice, the Office of Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (the “OIG”), the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, ("CMS") other regulatory authorities and the courts. There can be no assurance that our activities will not come under the scrutiny of regulators and other government authorities or that our practices will not be found to violate applicable laws, rules and regulations or prompt lawsuits by private citizen “relators” under federal or state false claims laws.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting or receiving any remuneration (including any kickback, bribe or rebate), directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, to induce or in return for purchasing, leasing, ordering or arranging for or recommending the purchase, lease or order of any good, facility, item or service reimbursable, in whole or in part, under Medicare, Medicaid or other federal healthcare programs. The term “remuneration” has been broadly interpreted to include anything of value. Although there are a number of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting some common activities from prosecution, the exceptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly. Practices that involve remuneration that may be alleged to be intended to induce prescribing, purchases or recommendations may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exception or safe harbor.

For example, even common business arrangements, such as discounted terms and volume incentives for customers in a position to recommend or choose drugs and devices for patients, such as physicians and hospitals, can result in substantial legal penalties, including, among other things, exclusion from Medicare and Medicaid programs if not carefully structured to comply with applicable requirements. Also, certain business practices, such as payment of consulting fees to healthcare providers, sponsorship of educational or research grants, charitable donations, interactions with healthcare providers and financial support for continuing medical education programs, must be conducted within narrowly prescribed and controlled limits to avoid any possibility of unlawfully inducing healthcare providers to prescribe or purchase particular products or rewarding past prescribing. Failure to meet all of the requirements of a particular applicable statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor does not make the conduct per se illegal under the Anti-Kickback Statute. Instead, the legality of the arrangement will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis based on a cumulative review of all its facts and circumstances. Several courts have interpreted the statute’s intent requirement to mean that if any one purpose of an arrangement involving remuneration is to induce referrals of federal healthcare covered business, the Anti-Kickback Statute has been violated. In addition, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. Violations of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute may result in significant civil monetary penalties for each violation, plus up to three times the remuneration involved. Moreover, a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal civil False Claims Act. Accordingly, civil penalties for such conduct can further be assessed under the federal False Claims Act. Violations can also result in criminal penalties, including criminal fines and imprisonment. Similarly, violations can result in exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs, including Medicare and Medicaid.

Significant enforcement activity has also taken place under federal and state false claims act statutes. Violations of the federal False Claims Act can result in treble damages, and a penalty for each false claim submitted for payment. Pharmaceutical, device and other healthcare companies have been prosecuted under these laws for, among other things, allegedly providing free product to customers with the expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for the product. Companies have been prosecuted for causing false claims to be submitted because of the companies’ marketing of products for unapproved, and thus non-covered, uses. The government may further prosecute conduct constituting a false claim under the criminal False Claims Act. The criminal False Claims Act prohibits the making or presenting of a claim to the government knowing such claim to be false, fictitious, or fraudulent and, unlike the civil False Claims Act, requires proof of intent to submit a false claim.

The federal False Claims Act, as well as certain state false claims acts, also permits relators to file complaints in the name of the United States (and if applicable, particular states). These relators may be entitled to receive up to 30% of total recoveries and have been active in pursuing cases against pharmaceutical companies. Where practices have been found to involve improper incentives to use products, the submission of false claims, or other improper conduct, government investigations and assessments of penalties against manufacturers have resulted in substantial damages and fines. In addition, to avoid exclusion from participation in federal healthcare programs, many manufacturers have been required to enter into Corporate Integrity Agreements that prescribe allowable corporate conduct and impose reporting and disclosure obligations by the manufacturer to the government. Failure to satisfy requirements under the FDCA can also result in a variety of administrative, civil and criminal penalties, including injunctions or consent decrees that prescribe allowable corporate conduct.

The federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, created additional federal criminal statutes that prohibit, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, including private third-party payors, knowingly and willfully embezzling or stealing from a healthcare benefit program, willfully obstructing a criminal investigation of a healthcare offense, and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services. Like the Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation.

Additionally, there has been a recent trend of increased federal and state regulation of payments and transfers of value provided to healthcare professionals and/or entities. The Affordable Care Act, among other things, imposed annual reporting requirements on certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologicals and medical supplies for payments and other transfers of value provided by them, directly or indirectly, to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), certain non-physician practitioners (physician assistants, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, certified registered nurse anesthetists, anesthesiologist assistants, and certified nurse midwives), and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their family members. A manufacturer’s failure to submit timely, accurately and completely the required information for all payments, transfers of value or ownership or investment interests may result in significant civil monetary penalties.

In addition, we are subject to analogous state and foreign laws and regulations, such as state anti-kickback and false claims laws, which may apply to sales or marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by non-governmental third-party payors, including private insurers; state and foreign laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the governments or otherwise restrict payments that may be made to healthcare providers. For instance, payments made to physicians in certain EU member states must be publicly disclosed. Moreover, agreements with physicians must often be subject of prior notification and/or approval by the physician’s employer, their competent professional organization, and/or the competent authorities of the individual EU member states.; state and foreign laws that require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures; state and foreign laws requiring the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives, and state and foreign laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances. Many of these laws differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA thus complicating compliance efforts.

Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations may involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices do not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, including, without limitation, damages, fines, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. If any of the physicians or other healthcare providers or entities with whom we expect to do business is found not to be in compliance with applicable laws, it may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from participation in government healthcare programs, which could also materially affect our business.

As a public company with securities registered under the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), we are subject to the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (the “FCPA”). The FCPA and similar worldwide anti-bribery laws generally prohibit companies and their intermediaries from making improper payments to officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. While we continue to maintain and enhance internal policies mandating compliance with these anti-bribery laws, we may operate in parts of the world that have experienced governmental corruption to some degree and in certain circumstances, strict compliance with anti-bribery laws may conflict with local customs and practices or may require us to interact with doctors and hospitals, some of which may be state controlled, in a manner that is different than in the United States. Our internal control policies and procedures may not be sufficient to effectively protect us against reckless or criminal acts committed by our employees or agents. Violations of these laws, or allegations of such violations, could disrupt our business and result in a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

The global data protection landscape is rapidly evolving, and we are or may become subject to numerous state, federal and foreign laws, requirements and regulations governing the collection, use, disclosure, retention, and security of personal information, such as information that we may collect in connection with clinical trials. Implementation standards and enforcement practices are likely to remain uncertain for the foreseeable future, and we cannot yet determine the impact future laws, regulations, standards, or perception of their requirements may have on our business. This evolution may create uncertainty in our business, affect our ability to operate in certain jurisdictions or to collect, store, transfer use and share personal information, necessitate the acceptance of more onerous obligations in our contracts, result in liability or impose additional costs on us. The cost of compliance with these laws, regulations and standards is high and is likely to increase in the future. Any failure or perceived failure by us to comply with federal, state or foreign laws or regulations, our internal policies and procedures or our contracts governing our processing of personal information could result in negative publicity, government investigations and enforcement actions, claims by third parties and damage to our reputation, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our operations, financial performance and business.

In the United States., HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009 and its implementing regulations, or collectively HIPAA, imposes, among other things, certain standards relating to the privacy, security, transmission and breach reporting of individually identifiable health information. Certain states have also adopted comparable privacy and security laws and regulations, some of which may be more stringent than HIPAA. Such laws and regulations will be subject to interpretation by various courts and other governmental authorities, thus creating potentially complex compliance issues for us and our customers and strategic partners. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”), which went into effect on January 1, 2020, among other things, creates new data privacy obligations for covered companies and provides individual privacy rights to California residents, including the right to opt out of certain disclosures of their information. The CCPA also creates a private right of action with statutory damages for certain data breaches, thereby potentially increasing risks associated with a data breach. Although the law includes limited exceptions, including for “protected health information” maintained by a covered entity or business associate, it may regulate or impact our processing of personal information depending on the context. Further, the California Privacy Rights Act (“CPRA”) recently passed in California. The CPRA will impose additional data protection obligations on covered businesses, including additional consumer rights processes, limitations on data uses, new audit requirements for higher risk data, and opt outs for certain uses of sensitive data. It will also create a new California data protection agency authorized to issue substantive regulations and could result in increased privacy and information security enforcement. The majority of the provisions will go into effect on January 1, 2023, and additional compliance investment and potential business process changes may be required. Similar laws have passed in Virginia and Colorado, and have been proposed in other states and at the federal level, reflecting a trend toward more stringent privacy legislation in the United States. The enactment of such laws could have potentially conflicting requirements that would make compliance challenging. In the event that we are subject to or affected by HIPAA, the CCPA, the CPRA or other domestic privacy and data protection laws, any liability from failure to comply with the requirements of these laws could adversely affect our financial condition.

We are subject to data privacy and security laws in the EU as well as the European Economic Area (“EEA”), including Regulation 2016/679, or the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) with respect to our collection, control, processing, sharing, disclosure and other use of personal data located in the EEA. The GDPR went into effect in May 2018, and companies that must comply with the GDPR face increased compliance obligations and risk, including more robust regulatory enforcement of data protection requirements and potential fines for noncompliance of up to €20 million or 4% of the annual global revenues of the noncompliant company, whichever is greater. Among other requirements, the GDPR regulates transfers of personal data subject to the GDPR to third countries that have not been found to provide adequate protection to such personal data, including the United States; in July 2020, the Court of Justice of the EU (“CJEU”) limited how organizations could lawfully transfer personal data from the EEA to the United States by invalidating the Privacy Shield for purposes of international transfers and imposing further restrictions on the use of standard contractual clauses (“SCCs”). The European Commission issued revised SCCs on June 4, 2021 to account for the decision of the CJEU and recommendations made by the European Data Protection Board. The revised SCCs must be used for relevant new data transfers from September 27, 2021; existing standard contractual clauses arrangements must be migrated to the revised clauses by December 27, 2022. The new SCCs apply only to the transfer of personal data outside of the EEA and not the United Kingdom; the United Kingdom’s Information Commissioner’s Office launched a public consultation on its draft revised data transfers mechanisms in August 2021. There is some uncertainty around whether the revised clauses can be used for all types of data transfers, particularly whether they can be relied on for data transfers to non-EEA entities subject to the GDPR. As supervisory authorities issue further guidance on personal data export mechanisms, including circumstances where the SCCs cannot be used, and/or start taking enforcement action, we could suffer additional costs, complaints and/or regulatory investigations or fines, and/or if we are otherwise unable to transfer personal data between and among countries and regions in which we operate, it could affect the manner in which we provide our services, the geographical location or segregation of our relevant systems and operations, and could adversely affect our financial results.

Further, since January 2021, we may also be subject to the UK GDPR, which, together with the UK Data Protection Act 2018, retains the GDPR in UK national law. The UK GDPR mirrors the fines under the GDPR, meaning the potential of parallel fines of up to the greater of £17.5 million or 4% of global turnover. The European Commission has adopted an adequacy decision in favor of the UK, enabling data transfers from EU member states to the UK without additional safeguards. However, the UK adequacy decision will automatically expire in June 2025 unless the European Commission re-assesses and renews/extends that decision and remains under review by the Commission during this period. In September 2021, the UK government launched a consultation on its proposals for wide-ranging reform of UK data protection laws following Brexit. There is a risk that any material changes which are made to the UK data protection regime could result in the European Commission reviewing the UK adequacy decision, and the UK losing its adequacy decision if the European Commission deems the UK to no longer provide adequate protection for personal data. The relationship between the UK and the EU in relation to certain aspects of data protection law remains uncertain, and it is unclear how UK data protection laws and regulations will develop in the medium to longer term.

We must comply with numerous laws and regulations relating to the formation, administration and performance of government contracts, which can make it more difficult for us to retain our rights under our BARDA contracts. These laws and regulations affect how we conduct business with government agencies. Among the most significant government contracting regulations that affect our business are:

Any material changes in applicable laws and regulations could restrict our ability to maintain our BARDA contracts or obtain new contracts with the U.S. federal government.

The development of biopharmaceutical products involves an inherent risk of product liability claims and associated adverse publicity. Our products may be found to be harmful or to contain harmful substances. This exposes us to substantial risk of litigation and liability or may force us to discontinue production of certain products. Although we have product liability insurance covering up to $10 million for claims in countries where NexoBrid is sold through our sales force or through our distributors, the coverage may not insure us against all claims that may be asserted against us. Product liability insurance is costly and often limited in scope. There can be no assurance that we will be able to obtain or maintain insurance on reasonable terms or to otherwise protect ourselves against potential product liability claims that could impede or prevent commercialization of NexoBrid, EscharEx or our pipeline product candidates. Furthermore, a product liability claim could damage our reputation, whether or not such claims are covered by insurance or are with or without merit. A product liability claim against us or the withdrawal of a product from the market could have a material adverse effect on our business or financial condition. Furthermore, product liability lawsuits, regardless of their success, would likely be time-consuming and expensive to resolve and would divert management’s time and attention, which could seriously harm our business.

Our business involves the controlled use of chemicals. The risk of accidental contamination or injury from these materials cannot be eliminated. If an accident, spill or release of any such chemicals or substances occurs, we could be held liable for resulting damages, including for investigation, remediation and monitoring of the contamination, including natural resource damages, the costs of which could be substantial. We are also subject to numerous environmental, health and workplace safety laws and regulations, including those governing laboratory procedures. Although we maintain workers’ compensation insurance to cover the costs and expenses that may be incurred because of injuries to our employees resulting from the use of these materials, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities. Additional or more stringent laws and regulations affecting our operations may be adopted in the future. We may incur substantial capital costs and operating expenses and may be required to obtain consents to comply with any of these or certain other laws or regulations and the terms and conditions of any permits required pursuant to such laws and regulations, including costs to install new or updated pollution control equipment, modify our operations or perform other corrective actions at our respective facilities. In addition, fines and penalties may be imposed for noncompliance with environmental, health and safety and other laws and regulations or for the failure to have, or comply with the terms and conditions of, required environmental or other permits or consents.

Following a national referendum and enactment of legislation by the government of the United Kingdom, the United Kingdom formally withdrew from the EU and ratified a trade and cooperation agreement governing its future relationship, commonly known as Brexit.  The agreement, which was applied provisionally from January 1, 2021 and entered into force on May 1, 2021, addresses trade, economic arrangements, law enforcement, judicial cooperation and a governance framework including procedures for dispute resolution, among other things.  Because the agreement merely sets forth a framework in many respects and will require complex additional bilateral negotiations between the United Kingdom and the EU as both parties continue to work on the rules for implementation, significant political and economic uncertainty remains about how the precise terms of the relationship between the paries will differ from the terms before withdrawal.  Since January 1, 2021, however, the United Kingdom has operated under a separate regulatory regime to the EU. EU laws regarding medicinal products only apply in respect of the United Kingdom to Northern Ireland (as set out in the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland). The EU laws that have been transposed into United Kingdom law through secondary legislation remain applicable. While the United Kingdom has indicated a general intention that new laws regarding the development, manufacture and commercialization of medicinal products in the United Kingdom will align closely with EU law, there are limited detailed proposals for future regulation of medicinal products. The trade and cooperation agreement includes specific provisions concerning medicinal products, which include the mutual recognition of GMP, inspections of manufacturing facilities for medicinal products and GMP documents issued (such mutual recognition can be rejected by either party in certain circumstances), but does not foresee wholesale mutual recognition of United Kingdom and EU pharmaceutical regulations. For example, it is not clear to what extent the United Kingdom will adopt legislation aligned with, or similar to, the EU Clinical Trial Regulation (“CTR”) that will become applicable on January 31, 2022 and which will significantly reform the assessment and supervision processes for clinical trials throughout the EU. Therefore, there remains political and economic uncertainty regarding to what extent the regulation of medicinal products will differ between the United Kingdom and the EU in the future. Any divergences will increase the cost and complexity of running our business, including with respect to the conduct of clinical trials. Brexit also materially impacted the regulatory regime with respect to the approval of our product candidates. Great Britain is no longer covered by the EU’s procedures for the grant of marketing authorizations (Northern Ireland is covered by the centralized authorization procedure and can be covered under the decentralized or mutual recognition procedures). As of 1 January 2021, all existing centralized marketing authorizations, such as the authorizations we have for NexoBrid, were automatically converted into United Kingdom marketing authorizations effective in Great Britain and issued with a United Kingdom marketing authorization number on January 1, 2021 (unless marketing authorization holders opted out of this scheme). A separate marketing authorization is now required to market drugs in Great Britain. It is currently unclear whether the regulator in the United Kingdom, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency is sufficiently prepared to handle the increased volume of marketing authorization applications that it is likely to receive. Any delay in obtaining, or an inability to obtain, any regulatory approvals, as a result of Brexit or otherwise, would prevent us from commercializing our product candidates in Great Britain and restrict our ability to generate revenue and achieve and sustain profitability. If any of these outcomes occur, we may be forced to restrict or delay efforts to seek regulatory approval in Great Britain for our product candidates, which could significantly and materially harm our business. Brexit could adversely affect European and worldwide economic and market conditions and could contribute to instability in global financial and foreign exchange markets, including volatility in the value of the sterling and euro. Any of these effects of Brexit, and others we cannot anticipate, could adversely affect our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

Our commercial success depends in part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection and trade secret protection for our intellectual property and proprietary technologies, our products and their uses, as well as our ability to operate without infringing upon the proprietary rights of others. We rely on a combination of patents, trademark and trade secret laws, non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements, licenses, assignments of invention agreements and other restrictions on disclosure and use to protect our intellectual property rights.

As of December 31, 2021, we had been granted a total of 64 patents and have 27 pending patent applications. The family of patents that covers NexoBrid specifically includes 35 granted patents worldwide. EscharEx is covered in 7 patents and 24 national phase applications. However, there can be no assurance that patent applications relating to our products, processes or technologies will result in patents being issued, that any patents that have been issued will be adequate to protect our intellectual property or that we will enjoy patent protection for any significant period of time. Additionally, any issued patents may be challenged by third parties, and patents that we hold may be found by a judicial authority to be invalid or unenforceable. Other parties may independently develop similar or competing technology or design around any patents that may be issued to or held by us. Our current patents will expire or they may otherwise cease to provide meaningful competitive advantage, and we may be unable to adequately develop new technologies and obtain future patent protection to preserve our competitive advantage or avoid adverse effects on our business.

At present, we consider our patents relating to our enzymatic platform technology, which underlies NexoBrid, EscharEx and our current pipeline product candidates, to be material to the operation of our business as a whole. Our patents which cover NexoBrid claim specific mixtures of proteolytic enzymes, methods of producing such mixtures and methods of treatment using such mixtures. Although the protection achieved is significant for NexoBrid, EscharEx and our pipeline product candidates, when looking at our patents’ ability to block competition, the protection offered by our patents may be, to some extent, more limited than the protection provided by patents which claim chemical structures that were previously unknown. If our patents covering NexoBrid in various jurisdictions were subject to a successful challenge or if a competitor were able to successfully design around them, our business and competitive advantage could be significantly affected.

In addition, the patent landscape in the biotechnology field is highly uncertain and involves complex legal, factual and scientific questions, and changes in either patent laws or in the interpretation of patent laws in the United States and other countries may diminish the value and strength of our intellectual property or narrow the scope of our patent protection. In addition, we may fail to apply for or be unable to obtain patents necessary to protect our technology or products or enforce our patents due to lack of information about the exact use of our process by third parties. Even if patents are issued to us, they may be challenged, narrowed, invalidated, held to be unenforceable or circumvented, which could limit our ability to prevent competitors from using similar technology or marketing similar products, or limit the length of time our technologies and products have patent protection. In addition, we are a party to license agreement with Mark Klein, that imposes various obligations upon us as a licensee, including the obligation to make milestone and royalty payments contingent on the sales of NexoBrid. If we fail to comply with these obligations, the licensor may terminate the license, in which event we might not be able to market any product that is covered by the licensed intellectual property, including NexoBrid.

In order to preserve and enforce our patents and other intellectual property rights, we may need to assert claims or file lawsuits against third parties. Such lawsuits could entail significant costs to us and divert our management’s attention from developing and commercializing our products. Lawsuits may ultimately be unsuccessful and may also subject us to counterclaims and cause our intellectual property rights to be challenged, narrowed, invalidated or held to be unenforceable.

Our material patents also may not afford us protection against competitors with similar technology. Because patent applications in the United States and many other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after their filing, if at all, and because publications of discoveries in scientific literature often lag behind actual discoveries, neither we nor our licensors can be certain that we or they were the first to make the inventions claimed in our or their issued patents or pending patent applications, or that we or they were the first to file for protection of the inventions set forth in such patent applications. As a result, the patents we own and license may be invalidated in the future, and the patent applications we own and license may not be granted. For example, if a third party has also filed a patent application covering an invention similar to one covered in one of our patent applications, we may be required to participate in an adversarial proceeding known as an “interference proceeding,” declared by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office or its foreign counterparts, to determine priority of invention. The costs of these proceedings could be substantial and our efforts in them could be unsuccessful, resulting in a loss of our anticipated patent position. In addition, if a third party prevails in such a proceeding and obtains an issued patent, we may be prevented from practicing technology or marketing products covered by that patent. Additionally, patents and patent applications owned by third parties may prevent us from pursuing certain opportunities such as entering into specific markets or developing certain products. Finally, we may choose to enter into markets where certain competitors have patents or patent protection over technology that may impede our ability to compete effectively.

Effective protection of our intellectual property rights may be unavailable or limited in some countries, and even if available, we may fail to pursue or obtain necessary intellectual property protection in such countries, including because filing, prosecuting, maintaining and defending patents on product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive. In addition, the legal systems of certain countries do not favor the aggressive enforcement of patents and other intellectual property rights, and the laws of certain foreign countries do not protect our rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States. As a result, our intellectual property may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products, and we may be unable to prevent such competitors from importing such infringing products into territories where we have patent protection but where enforcement is not as strong as in the United States or into jurisdictions in which we do not have patent protection. These products may compete with our product candidates and our patents and other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing in those jurisdictions.

Our currently issued NexoBrid Family patents are nominally due to expire at various dates between 2025 and 2029. However, because of the extensive time required for development, testing and regulatory review of a potential product, and although such delays may entitle us to patent term extensions, it is possible that, before NexoBrid can be commercialized in additional international jurisdictions and/or before any of our future products can be commercialized, any related patent may expire or remain in force for only a short period following commercialization, thereby reducing any advantages of the patent. The international PCT patent applications relating to EscharEx were filed on January 30, 2017. National phase applications corresponding to these PCT applications were filed in several jurisdictions and the expiration date of the seven patents that issued and those that will be issued is January 30, 2037, absent patent-term adjustment and/or extensions. Our pending and future patent applications may not lead to the issuance of patents or, if issued, the patents may not provide us with any competitive advantage. We also cannot guarantee that:

Additionally, unauthorized use of our intellectual property may have occurred or may occur in the future. Any failure to identify unauthorized use of, and otherwise adequately protect, our intellectual property could adversely affect our business, including by reducing the demand for our products. Any reported adverse events involving counterfeit products that purport to be our products could harm our reputation and the sale of our products. Moreover, if we are required to commence litigation related to unauthorized use, whether as a plaintiff or defendant, such litigation would be time-consuming, force us to incur significant costs and divert our attention and the efforts of our management and other employees, which could, in turn, result in lower revenue and higher expenses.

We rely on proprietary information, such as trade secrets, know-how and confidential information, to protect intellectual property that may not be patentable or that we believe is best protected by means that do not require public disclosure. We generally seek to protect this proprietary information by entering into confidentiality agreements, or consulting, services or employment agreements that contain non-disclosure and non-use provisions with our employees, consultants, contractors, scientific advisors and third parties. However, we may fail to enter into the necessary agreements, and even if entered into, these agreements may be breached or otherwise fail to prevent disclosure, third-party infringement or misappropriation of our proprietary information, may be limited as to their term and may not provide an adequate remedy in the event of unauthorized disclosure or use of proprietary information. We have limited control over the protection of trade secrets used by our suppliers and service providers and could lose future trade secret protection if any unauthorized disclosure of such information occurs. In addition, our proprietary information may otherwise become known or be independently developed by our competitors or other third parties. To the extent that our employees, consultants, contractors, scientific advisors and other third parties use intellectual property owned by others in their work for us, disputes may arise as to the related rights or resulting know-how and inventions. Costly and time-consuming litigation could be necessary to enforce and determine the scope of our and relevant third parties’ proprietary rights and failure to obtain or maintain protection for our proprietary information could adversely affect our competitive business position. In addition, if a third party is able to establish that we are using their proprietary information without their permission, we may be required to obtain a license to such information or, if such a license is not available, re-design our products to avoid any such unauthorized use or temporarily delay or permanently stop manufacturing or sales of the affected products. Furthermore, laws regarding trade secret rights in certain markets where we operate may afford little or no protection to our trade secrets.

We also rely on physical and electronic security measures to protect our proprietary information, but we cannot provide assurance that these security measures will not be breached or will provide adequate protection for our property. There is a risk that third parties may obtain and improperly utilize our proprietary information to our competitive disadvantage. We have also outsourced elements of our information technology infrastructure, and as a result a number of third-party vendors may or could have access to our confidential information. 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. We may not be able to detect or prevent the unauthorized use of such information or take appropriate and timely steps to enforce our intellectual property rights.

Some of our employees were previously employed at universities or other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including potential competitors. While we take steps to prevent our employees from using the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we or these employees have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed intellectual property, trade secrets or other proprietary information of any such employee’s former employer. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims and, even if we are successful in defending ourselves, could result in substantial costs to us or be distracting to our management. If we fail to defend any such claims successfully, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel.

We own trademarks that identify “MediWound,” “NexoBrid” and “EscharEx,” among others, and have registered these trademarks in certain key markets. Although we take steps to monitor the possible infringement or misuse of our trademarks, it is possible that third parties may infringe, dilute or otherwise violate our trademark rights. Any unauthorized use of our trademarks could harm our reputation or commercial interests. In addition, our enforcement against third-party infringers or violators may be unduly expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome may be an inadequate remedy.

Our development, marketing or sale of NexoBrid, EscharEx or our pipeline product candidates may infringe or be accused of infringing one or more claims of an issued patent to which we do not hold a license or other rights. We may also be subject to claims that we are infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating other intellectual property rights, such as trademarks, copyrights or trade secrets. Third parties could therefore bring claims against us or our strategic partners that would cause us to incur substantial expenses, including litigation costs or costs associated with settlement, and, if successful against us, could cause us to pay substantial damages. Further, if such a claim were brought against us, we could be forced to temporarily delay or permanently stop manufacturing or sales of NexoBrid, EscharEx or our pipeline product candidates that are the subject of the suit.

If we are found to be infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating the patent or other intellectual property rights of a third party, or in order to avoid or settle claims, we may choose or be required to seek a license from a third party and be required to pay license fees or royalties or both, which could be substantial. These licenses may not be available on acceptable terms, or at all. Even if we were able to obtain a license, the rights may be nonexclusive, which could result in our competitors gaining access to the same intellectual property. Ultimately, we could be prevented from commercializing a product, or be forced to cease some aspect of our business operations, if, as a result of actual or threatened claims, we or our strategic partners are unable to enter into licenses on acceptable terms.

There have been substantial litigation and other proceedings regarding patent and other intellectual property rights in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries. In addition, to the extent that we gain greater visibility and market exposure as a public company in the United States, we face a greater risk of being involved in such litigation. In addition to infringement claims against us, we may become a party to other patent litigation and other proceedings, including interference, opposition, re-examination and similar proceedings before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and its foreign counterparts, regarding intellectual property rights with respect to NexoBrid, EscharEx or our pipeline product candidates. The cost to us of any patent litigation or other proceeding, even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial. A negative outcome could result in liability for monetary damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees if, for example, we are found to have willfully infringed a patent. A finding of infringement could prevent us from developing, marketing or selling a product or force us to cease some or all of our business operations. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their substantially greater financial resources. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete in the marketplace, and patent litigation and other proceedings may also absorb significant management time.

We generally enter into non-competition agreements with our employees. These agreements prohibit our employees, if they cease working for us, from competing directly with us or working for our competitors or clients for a limited period. We may be unable to enforce these agreements under the laws of the jurisdictions in which our employees work and it may be difficult for us to restrict our competitors from benefitting from the expertise our former employees or consultants developed while working for us. For example, Israeli labor courts have required employers seeking to enforce non-compete undertakings of a former employee to demonstrate that the competitive activities of the former employee will harm one of a limited number of material interests of the employer which have been recognized by the courts, such as the protection of a company’s trade secrets or other intellectual property.

A significant portion of our intellectual property has been developed for us by our employees in the course of their employment. Under the Israeli Patent Law, 5727-1967, or the Patent Law, inventions conceived by an employee in the course and as a result of or arising from his or her employment with a company are regarded as “service inventions,” which belong to the employer, absent a specific agreement between the employee and employer giving the employee proprietary rights. The Patent Law also provides under Section 134 that if there is no agreement between an employer and an employee as to whether the employee is entitled to consideration for service inventions, and to what extent and under which conditions, the Israeli Compensation and Royalties Committee, or the Committee, a body constituted under the Patent Law, shall determine these issues. Section 135 of the Patent law provides criteria for assisting the Committee in making its decisions. According to case law handed down by the Committee, an employee’s right to receive consideration for service inventions is a personal right and is entirely separate from the proprietary rights in such invention. Therefore, this right must be explicitly waived by the employee. A decision handed down in May 2014 by the Committee clarifies that the right to receive consideration under Section 134 can be waived and that such waiver can be made orally, in writing or by behavior like any other contract. The Committee will examine, on a case by case basis, the general contractual framework between the parties, using interpretation rules of the general Israeli contract laws. Further, the Committee has not yet determined one specific formula for calculating this remuneration, nor the criteria or circumstances under which an employee’s waiver of his right to remuneration will be disregarded. Similarly, it remains unclear whether waivers by employees in their employment agreements of the alleged right to receive consideration for service inventions should be declared as void being a depriving provision in a standard contract. We generally enter into assignment-of-invention agreements with our employees pursuant to which such individuals assign to us all rights to any inventions created in the scope of their employment or engagement with us. Although our employees have agreed to assign to us service invention rights and have specifically waived their right to receive any special remuneration for such service inventions beyond their regular salary and benefits, we may face claims demanding remuneration in consideration for assigned inventions. As a consequence of such claims, we could be required to pay additional remuneration or royalties to our current or former employees or be forced to litigate such claims, which could negatively affect our business.

Our ordinary shares were first offered publicly in our IPO in March 2014 at a price of $14.00 per share, and our ordinary shares have subsequently traded as high as $18.16 per share and as low as $1.47 per share through March 15, 2022. The market price of our ordinary shares on the Nasdaq Global Market may fluctuate as a result of a number of factors, some of which are beyond our control, including, but not limited to:

These factors and any corresponding price fluctuations may materially and adversely affect the market price of our ordinary shares and result in substantial losses being incurred by our investors. In the past, following periods of market volatility, public company shareholders have often instituted securities class action litigation. If we were involved in securities litigation, it could impose a substantial cost upon us and divert the resources and attention of our management from our business.

If we or our existing shareholders, our directors or their affiliates or certain of our executive officers, sell a substantial number of our ordinary shares in the public market, the market price of our ordinary shares could decrease significantly. The perception in the public market that we or our shareholders might sell our ordinary shares could also depress the market price of our ordinary shares and could impair our future ability to obtain capital, especially through an offering of equity securities.

We have made significant offerings of our ordinary shares in the past and may do so again in the future.  For example, on April 23, 2019, the SEC declared effective our shelf registration statement on Form F-3, which registered the resale of 11,240,127 shares that are subject to registration rights. All shares sold pursuant to an offering covered by that registration statement (or a subsequent shelf registration that we may file to replace it after it expires) will be freely transferable. See “ITEM 7.B. Related Party Transactions—Registration Rights Agreement.” In February 2020, we entered into an Open Market Sales Agreement with Jefferies LLC to issue and sell our ordinary shares with gross sales proceeds of up to $15 million, from time to time, through an at the market offering under which Jefferies LLC will act as our sales agent. As of the date hereof, we have not issued or sold any ordinary shares pursuant to the Open Market Sales Agreement. Sales by us or our shareholders of a substantial number of ordinary shares in the public market could cause the market price of our ordinary shares to decline or could impair our ability to raise capital through a future sale of, or pay for acquisitions using, our equity securities.

In addition, as of March 15, 2022, 3,834,697 ordinary shares were subject to outstanding option and RSU awards granted to employees and office holders under our share incentive plans, including 2,534,103 ordinary shares issuable under currently exercisable share options and RSUs. On April 28, 2014, we filed a registration statement on Form S-8 registering the issuance of up to 3,032,742 ordinary shares issuable under our share incentive plans, which amount included 960,932 ordinary shares issuable upon the exercise of option awards previously granted under our 2003 Israeli Share Option Plan and 1,482,044 ordinary shares issuable under our 2014 Equity Incentive Plan. On January 1, 2016, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021, the shares available for issuance under our 2014 Equity Incentive Plan automatically increased by 431,006, 540,955, 543,577, 544,055 and 544,738 shares, respectively. As of March 15, 2022, 4,325,624 shares remained available for issuance under our share incentive plans, which amount includes 490,927 ordinary shares subject to outstanding awards. Shares included in such registration statement may be freely sold in the public market upon issuance, except for shares held by affiliates who have certain restrictions on their ability to sell.

As of March 15, 2022, Clal Biotechnology Industries Ltd. (“CBI”), beneficially owns or controls, directly and indirectly, 33.8% of our issued and outstanding ordinary shares. Accordingly, CBI is able to significantly influence the outcome of matters required to be submitted to our shareholders for approval, including decisions relating to the election of our board of directors and the outcome of any proposed merger or consolidation of the company. CBI’s interests may not be consistent with those of our other shareholders. In addition, CBI’s significant interest in us may discourage third parties from seeking to acquire control of us, which may adversely affect the market price of our ordinary shares.

We have never declared or paid cash dividends on our share capital, nor do we anticipate paying any cash dividends on our share capital in the foreseeable future. We currently intend to retain all available funds and any future earnings to fund the development and growth of our business. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, of our ordinary shares will be an investor’s sole source of gain for the foreseeable future. In addition, Israeli law limits our ability to declare and pay dividends, and may subject our dividends to Israeli withholding taxes. See “ITEM 8.A. Consolidated Statements and Other Financial Information—Dividend Policy,” “ITEM 10.B. Articles of Association—Dividend and liquidation rights” and “ITEM 10.E. Taxation—Israeli Tax Considerations and Government Programs.”

As a foreign private issuer, we are permitted to, and do, follow certain home country corporate governance practices instead of those otherwise required under the Nasdaq Stock Market listing rules for domestic U.S. issuers. For instance, we follow home country practice in Israel with regard to the (i) quorum requirement for shareholder meetings, (ii) independent director oversight of director nominations requirement, (iii) independence requirement for the board of directors and (iv) shareholder approval for certain transactions other than a public offering involving issuances of a 20% or more interest in the company. See “ITEM 16G. Corporate Governance.” We may in the future elect to follow home country practices in Israel with regard to other matters as well, such as the formation and composition of the nominating and corporate governance committee, separate executive sessions of independent directors and the requirement to obtain shareholder approval for certain dilutive events (such as for the establishment or amendment of certain equity-based compensation plans, issuances that will result in a change of control of the company, and certain acquisitions of the stock or assets of another company). Following our home country governance practices as opposed to the requirements that would otherwise apply to a U.S. company listed on the Nasdaq Global Market may provide less protection to you than what is accorded to investors under the Nasdaq Stock Market listing rules applicable to domestic U.S. issuers. See “ITEM 16G. Corporate Governance.”

As a foreign private issuer, we are exempt from the rules and regulations under the Exchange Act related to the furnishing and content of proxy statements, and our officers, directors and principal shareholders are exempt from the reporting and short-swing profit recovery provisions contained in Section 16 of the Exchange Act. In addition, we are not required under the Exchange Act to file annual and current reports and financial statements with the SEC as frequently or as promptly as U.S. domestic companies whose securities are registered under the Exchange Act, and we are generally exempt from filing quarterly reports with the SEC under the Exchange Act. Moreover, we are not required to comply with Regulation FD, which prohibits the selective disclosure of material nonpublic information to, among others, broker-dealers and holders of a company’s securities under circumstances in which it is reasonably foreseeable that the holder will trade in the company’s securities on the basis of the information. Even though we intend to comply voluntarily with Regulation FD, these exemptions and leniencies will reduce the frequency and scope of information and protections to which you are entitled as an investor.

For so long as we qualify as a foreign private issuer, we are not required to comply with the proxy rules applicable to U.S. domestic companies, including the requirement applicable to emerging growth companies to disclose the compensation of our Chief Executive Officer and other two most highly compensated executive officers on an individual, rather than an aggregate, basis. Nevertheless, the regulations promulgated under the Israeli Companies Law, 5759-1999 (the “Israeli Companies Law”) require us to disclose the annual compensation of our five most highly compensated officers on an individual, rather than on an aggregate, basis. See “ITEM 6.B. Compensation.” Under the Companies Law regulations, this disclosure is required to be included in the proxy statement for our annual meeting of shareholders each year, which we furnish to the SEC under cover of a Report of Foreign Private Issuer on Form 6-K. Because of that disclosure requirement under Israeli law, we are also including such information in this annual report, pursuant to the disclosure requirements of Form 20-F.

We would lose our foreign private issuer status if a majority of our outstanding ordinary shares are held of record by U.S. shareholders and we fail to meet additional requirements necessary to avoid loss of foreign private issuer status. Although we have elected to comply with certain U.S. regulatory provisions, our loss of foreign private issuer status would make such provisions mandatory. The regulatory and compliance costs to us under U.S. securities laws as a U.S. domestic issuer may be significantly higher. If we lose our foreign private issuer status, we will be required to file periodic reports and registration statements on U.S. domestic issuer forms with the SEC, which are more detailed and extensive than the forms available to a foreign private issuer. We would also be required to follow U.S. proxy disclosure requirements, including the requirement to disclose more detailed information about the compensation of our senior executive officers on an individual basis. We may also be required to modify certain of our policies to comply with accepted governance practices associated with U.S. domestic issuers. Such conversion and modifications will involve additional costs. In addition, we would lose our ability to rely upon exemptions from certain corporate governance requirements on U.S. stock exchanges that are available to foreign private issuers.

We are required to comply with the internal control, evaluation and certification requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Sarbanes-Oxley Act”). Pursuant to Section 404(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, we are required to furnish a report by management on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. If we become an accelerated filer or a large accelerated filer, we will be required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes Oxley Act.

To maintain the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures and our internal control over financial reporting, we expect that we will need to continue to enhance existing, and implement new, financial reporting and management systems, procedures and controls to manage our business effectively and support our growth in the future. The process of evaluating our internal control over financial reporting requires an investment of substantial time and resources, including by our Chief Financial Officer and other members of our senior management. The determination and any remedial actions required could divert internal resources and take a significant amount of time and effort to complete and could result in us incurring additional costs that we did not anticipate, including the hiring of outside consultants.

Irrespective of compliance with Section 404, any failure of our internal controls could have a material adverse effect on our stated results of operations and harm our reputation. As a result, we may experience higher than anticipated operating expenses, as well as higher independent auditor fees during and after the implementation of these changes. If we are unable to implement any of the required changes to our internal control over financial reporting effectively or efficiently, it could adversely affect our operations, financial reporting or results of operations. Further, if our internal controls over financial reporting are not effective, the reliability of our financial statements may be questioned and our share price may suffer.

Generally, if for any taxable year 75% or more of our gross income is passive income, or at least 50% of the average quarterly value of our assets (which may be determined in part by the market value of our ordinary shares, which is subject to change) are held for the production of, or produce, passive income, we would be characterized as a passive foreign investment company (“PFIC”) for U.S. federal income tax purposes. Based on our current estimates of our gross income and gross assets and the nature of our business, we do not believe we were classified as a PFIC for the taxable year ended December 31, 2021. There can be no assurance that we will not be considered a PFIC for the current or any future taxable year. PFIC status is determined as of the end of the taxable year and depends on a number of factors, including the value of a corporation’s assets and the amount and type of its gross income. Furthermore, the value of our gross assets is likely to be determined in large part by reference to our market capitalization. As such, a decline in the value of our ordinary shares or an increase in the value of our passive assets (including cash and short term investments), for example, may result in our becoming a PFIC. If we are characterized as a PFIC, our U.S. shareholders may suffer adverse tax consequences, including having gains realized on the sale of our ordinary shares treated as ordinary income, rather than as capital gain, the loss of the preferential rate that may be applicable to dividends received on our ordinary shares by individuals who are U.S. Holders (as defined in “ITEM 10.E. Taxation—United States Federal Income Taxation”), and having interest charges apply to distributions by us and the proceeds of share sales. Certain elections exist that may alleviate some of the adverse consequences of PFIC status and would result in an alternative treatment (such as mark-to-market treatment) of our ordinary shares. However, we do not intend to provide the information necessary for U.S. holders to make qualified electing fund elections if we are classified as a PFIC. See “ITEM 10.E. Taxation—United States Federal Income Taxation—Passive Foreign Investment Company Considerations.”

If a U.S. person is treated as owning (directly, indirectly, or constructively) at least 10% of the value or voting power of our ordinary shares, such person may be treated as a “U.S. shareholder” with respect to each “controlled foreign corporation” in our group (if any). Since our group includes one or more U.S. subsidiaries, certain of our non-U.S. subsidiaries will be treated as controlled foreign corporations (regardless of whether or not we are treated as a controlled foreign corporation). A U.S. shareholder of a controlled foreign corporation may be required to report annually and include in its U.S. taxable income its pro rata share of “Subpart F income,” “global intangible low-taxed income,” and investments in U.S. property by controlled foreign corporations, regardless of whether the Company makes any distributions. An individual that is a U.S. shareholder with respect to a controlled foreign corporation generally would not be allowed certain tax deductions or foreign tax credits that would be allowed to a U.S. shareholder that is a U.S. corporation. Failure to comply with these reporting obligations may subject a U.S. shareholder to significant monetary penalties and may prevent the statute of limitations with respect to such U.S. shareholder’s U.S. federal income tax return for the year for which reporting was due from starting. We cannot provide any assurances that we will assist holders of ordinary shares in determining whether any of our non-U.S. subsidiaries is treated as a controlled foreign corporation or whether any holder of ordinary shares is treated as a U.S. shareholder with respect to any such controlled foreign corporation or furnish to any U.S. shareholders information that may be necessary to comply with the aforementioned reporting and tax paying obligations. The United States Internal Revenue Service has provided limited guidance on situations in which investors may rely on publicly available information to comply with their reporting and taxpaying obligations with respect to foreign-controlled controlled foreign corporations. A U.S. holder should consult its tax advisors regarding the potential application of these rules to an investment in the ordinary shares.

Our headquarters, manufacturing and research and development facilities are located in Yavne, Israel. In addition, the majority of our key employees, officers and directors are residents of Israel. In recent years, there has been political, instability in Israel, including four national elections within the last two-plus years. Over the past decade, there have been multiple hostilities between Israel and Hamas (an Islamist militia and political group in the Gaza strip) and in the summer of 2006, there was an armed conflict between Israel and Hezbollah (an Islamist militia and political group in Lebanon). Even during times without formal conflict, Hamas and other terrorist groups in the Gaza strip have shot rockets into southern Israel, which have sometimes damaged civilian and commercial property.

In recent years, Iran, which has threatened to attack Israel and is widely believed to be developing nuclear weapons, has been expanding its influence in Syria and in Lebanon through Hezbollah and other proxy terrorist groups. Although Iran’s activities have not directly affected the political and economic conditions in Israel, Iran’s purpose is widely believed to take control of the Middle East, including Israel. Israel has responded with attacks on Iranian military operations in Syria. These events and any future political, economic and military instability have the potential to interrupt our operations by damaging our facilities (to the extent rocket attacks against Israel reach the region of our headquarters) or preventing our employees, officers and directors from working. Such interruptions or stoppages may result in a material adverse effect on our business, operations and results of operations.

Our commercial insurance does not cover losses that may occur as a result of an event associated with the security situation in the Middle East. The reinstatement value of direct damages that are caused by terrorist attacks or acts of war that the Israeli government is currently committed to covering might not be maintained or, if maintained, might not be sufficient to compensate us fully for damages incurred. Any losses or damages incurred by us could have a material adverse effect on our business. Any armed conflict involving Israel could adversely affect our operations and results of operations.

As of December 31, 2021, we had 67 employees based in Israel, certain of whom may be called upon to perform up to 54 days (and in the case of non-officer commanders or officers, up to 70 or 84 days, respectively) of military reserve duty in each three-year period until they reach the age of 40 (and in some cases, depending on their specific military profession, up to 45 or even 49 years of age). In certain emergency circumstances, these employees may be called to immediate and unlimited active duty. Our operations could be disrupted by the absence of a significant number of employees related to military service, which could materially adversely affect our business and results of operations.

Several countries, principally in the Middle East, restrict doing business with Israel and Israeli companies, and additional countries may impose restrictions on doing business with Israel and Israeli companies whether as a result of hostilities in the region or otherwise. In addition, there have been increased efforts by activists to cause companies and consumers to boycott Israeli goods based on Israeli government policies. Recently, Israel has signed bilateral peace agreements with several Middle Eastern (including Arab) countries, forging new economic ties with them. Nevertheless, if the actions by boycott activists become more widespread and successful, that may adversely impact our ability to sell our products.

Israeli corporate law regulates mergers, requires tender offers for acquisitions of shares above specified thresholds, requires special approvals for transactions involving directors, officers or significant shareholders and regulates other matters that may be relevant to such types of transactions. For example, a tender offer for all of a company’s issued and outstanding shares can only be completed if the acquirer receives positive responses from the holders of at least 95% of the issued share capital. Completion of the tender offer also requires approval of a majority of the offerees that do not have a personal interest in the tender offer, unless, following consummation of the tender offer, the acquirer would hold at least 98% of the company’s outstanding shares. Furthermore, the shareholders, including those who indicated their acceptance of the tender offer, may, at any time within six months following the completion of the tender offer, petition an Israeli court to alter the consideration for the acquisition, unless the acquirer stipulated in its tender offer that a shareholder that accepts the offer may not seek such appraisal rights. See “ITEM 10.B. Articles of Association—Acquisitions Under Israeli law” for additional information.

Furthermore, Israeli tax considerations may make potential transactions unappealing to us or to our shareholders whose country of residence does not have a tax treaty with Israel exempting such shareholders from Israeli tax. For example, Israeli tax law does not recognize tax-free share exchanges to the same extent as U.S. tax law. With respect to mergers, Israeli tax law allows for tax deferral in certain circumstances but makes the deferral contingent on the fulfillment of a number of conditions, including, in some cases, a holding period of two years from the date of the transaction during which sales and dispositions of shares of the participating companies are subject to certain restrictions. Moreover, with respect to certain share swap transactions, the tax deferral is limited in time, and when such time expires, the tax becomes payable even if no disposition of the shares has occurred.

Our research and development efforts have been financed in part through grants from the Israeli Innovation Authority (“IIA”), formerly operating as the Israeli Office of the Chief Scientist (the “OCS”). The total gross amount of grants actually received by us from the IIA, including accrued LIBOR interest (or such other interest rate that the IIA may set in the future) and net of royalties actually paid as of December 31, 2021, totaled approximately 13.7 million and the amortized cost (using the interest method) of the liability as of that date totaled approximately 8.1 million. As of December 31, 2021, we had accrued and paid net royalties to the IIA in an amount of 0.36 million. As of December 31, 2018 we determined that we will no longer be supported by the IIA. As a result, we did not submit applications for IIA grants in 2020 and 2021 and we do not plan to submit in 2022.

The IIA grants that we have received are repayable by payment of royalties from the sale of products developed as part of the programs for which grants were received. Our obligation to pay these royalties is contingent on our actual sale of such products and services. In the absence of such sales, no payment of such royalties is required.

Even following full repayment of any IIA grants, we must nevertheless continue to comply with the requirements of the Encouragement of Research, Development and Technological Innovation in the Industry Law, 5744-1984 (formerly known as the Law for the Encouragement of Industrial Research and Development, 5744-1984), and related regulations (collectively, the “Innovation Law”). When a company develops know-how, technology or products using IIA grants, the terms of these grants and the Innovation Law restrict the transfer outside of Israel of such know-how, and the manufacturing or manufacturing rights of such products, technologies or know-how, without the prior approval of the IIA. Therefore, if aspects of our technologies are deemed to have been developed with IIA funding, the discretionary approval of an IIA committee would be required for any transfer to third parties outside of Israel of know-how or manufacturing or manufacturing rights related to those aspects of such technologies. We may not receive those approvals. Furthermore, the IIA may impose certain conditions on any arrangement under which it permits us to transfer technology or development out of Israel.

The transfer of IIA-supported technology or know-how or manufacturing or manufacturing rights related to aspects of such technologies outside of Israel may involve the payment of significant penalties and other amounts, depending upon the value of the transferred technology or know-how, the amount of IIA support, the time of completion of the IIA-supported research project and other factors. If our products are manufactured outside of Israel, assuming we receive prior approval from the IIA for the foreign manufacturing, we may be required to pay increased royalties. The increase in royalties depends on the manufacturing volume that is performed outside of Israel. These restrictions and requirements for payment may impair our ability to sell our technology assets outside of Israel or to outsource or transfer development or manufacturing activities with respect to any product or technology outside of Israel. Furthermore, the consideration available to our shareholders in a transaction involving the transfer outside of Israel of technology or know-how developed with IIA funding (such as a merger or similar transaction) may be reduced by any amounts that we are required to pay to the IIA.

We are incorporated in Israel. All of our executive officers and three of our directors listed in this annual report reside outside of the United States, and most of our assets and most of the assets of these persons are located outside of the United States. Therefore, a judgment obtained against us, or any of these persons, including a judgment based on the civil liability provisions of the U.S. federal securities laws, may not be collectible in the United States and may not be enforced by an Israeli court. It also may be difficult for you to effect service of process on these persons in the United States or to assert U.S. securities law claims in original actions instituted in Israel. Israeli courts may refuse to hear a claim based on an alleged violation of U.S. securities laws reasoning that Israel is not the most appropriate forum in which to bring such a claim. In addition, even if an Israeli court agrees to hear a claim, it may determine that Israeli law and not U.S. law is applicable to the claim. If U.S. law is found to be applicable, the content of applicable U.S. law must be proven as a fact by expert witnesses, which can be a time-consuming and costly process. Certain matters of procedure will also be governed by Israeli law. There is little binding case law in Israel that addresses the matters described above. As a result of the difficulty associated with enforcing a judgment against us in Israel, you may not be able to collect any damages awarded by either a U.S. or foreign court.

Since we are incorporated under Israeli law, the rights and responsibilities of our shareholders are governed by our articles of association and Israeli law. These rights and responsibilities differ in some respects from the rights and responsibilities of shareholders in U.S.-based corporations. In particular, a shareholder of an Israeli company has a duty to act in good faith and in a customary manner in exercising its rights and performing its obligations towards the company and other shareholders and to refrain from abusing its power in the company, including, among other things, in voting at the general meeting of shareholders on certain matters, such as an amendment to the company’s articles of association, an increase of the company’s authorized share capital, a merger of the company and approval of related party transactions that require shareholder approval. A shareholder also has a general duty to refrain from discriminating against other shareholders. In addition, a controlling shareholder or a shareholder who knows that it possesses the power to determine the outcome of a shareholders’ vote or to appoint or prevent the appointment of an office holder in the company or has another power with respect to the company, has a duty to act in fairness towards the company. However, Israeli law does not define the substance of this duty of fairness. See “ITEM 6.C. Board Practices.” Some of the parameters and implications of the provisions that govern shareholder behavior have not been clearly determined. These provisions may be interpreted to impose additional obligations and liabilities on our shareholders that are not typically imposed on shareholders of U.S. corporations.

Additionally, the quorum requirements for meetings of our shareholders are lower than is customary for domestic issuers. As permitted under the Companies Law, pursuant to our articles of association, the quorum required for an ordinary meeting of shareholders will consist of at least two shareholders present in person, by proxy or by other voting instrument in accordance with the Companies Law, who hold at least 25% of our outstanding ordinary shares. For an adjourned meeting at which a quorum is not present, the meeting may generally proceed irrespective of the number of shareholders present at the end of half an hour following the time fixed for the meeting.

The trading market for our ordinary shares relies in part on the research and reports that equity research analysts publish about us and our business. We do not have control over these analysts and we do not have commitments from them to write research reports about us. The price of our ordinary shares could decline if no research reports are published about us or our business, or if one or more equity research analysts downgrades our ordinary shares or if those analysts issue other unfavorable commentary or cease publishing reports about us or our business.

MediWound Ltd. ("MediWound") is a company limited by shares organized under the laws of the State of Israel in January 2000. We are registered with the Israeli Registrar of Companies. Our registration number is 51-289494-0. Our principal executive offices are located at 42 Hayarkon Street, Yavne 8122745, Israel, and our telephone number is +972 (77)-971-4100. Our website address is www.MediWound.com. Information contained on, or that can be accessed through, our website does not constitute a part of this annual report and is not incorporated by reference herein. We have included our website address in this annual report solely for informational purposes. Our agent for service of process in the United States is Puglisi & Associates, located at 850 Library Avenue, Suite 204, Newark, Delaware 19711, and its telephone number is +1 (302) 738-6680. The SEC maintains an internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC at: http://www.sec.gov.

We are a biopharmaceutical company that develops, manufactures and commercializes novel, cost effective, bio-therapeutic solutions for tissue repair and regeneration. Our strategy leverages our breakthrough enzymatic technology platform into a diversified portfolio of biotherapeutics across multiple indications to pioneer solutions for unmet medical needs.  Our current portfolio is focused on next-generation protein-based therapies for burn and wound care and tissue repair.

Our first innovative biopharmaceutical product, NexoBrid, has received marketing authorization in Europe and other international markets for removal of dead or damaged tissue, known as eschar, in adults with deep partial- and full-thickness thermal burns, also referred to as severe burns. NexoBrid, a concentrate of proteolytic enzymes enriched in bromelain, represents a new paradigm in burn care management, and our clinical trials have demonstrated, with statistical significance, its ability to non-surgically and rapidly remove the eschar earlier relative to existing standard of care upon patient admission, without harming viable tissues. In September 2020, the FDA accepted for review our Biologics License Application (“BLA”), which was based on acute data, including primary, secondary and safety endpoints, as well as 12-month safety follow-up data derived from our Phase 3 pivotal study. In June 2021, we received a Complete Response Letter (“CRL”) from the FDA stating that our BLA was not approved. We had a Type A meeting with the FDA in October 2021 to discuss a path forward for resubmission, in which we gained clarity on a path forward for resubmission of the BLA, and we plan to resubmit our BLA for NexoBrid in mid-2022.

We commercialize NexoBrid globally through multiple sales channels. We sell NexoBrid to burn centers in the European Union, United Kingdom, Norway, Switzerland and Israel, primarily through our direct sales force, focusing on key burn centers and Key Opinion Leaders (“KOL”) management, while establishing additional local distribution channels to extend our outreach in the European Union. In the United States, we entered into exclusive license and supply agreements with Vericel Corporation to commercialize NexoBrid in North America upon FDA's approval. We have signed distribution agreements with local distributors in multiple international markets, focusing in Asia Pacific, EMEA, CEE and LATAM, which are responsible for obtaining local marketing authorization within the relevant territory.

EscharEx, our next-generation enzymatic therapy under development, is a topical biological drug candidate for the debridement of chronic and other hard-to-heal wounds. EscharEx active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) is a concentrate of proteolytic enzymes enriched in bromelain. In two completed phase 2 trials, EscharEx was well tolerated and has demonstrated safety and efficacy in the debridement of various chronic and other hard-to-heal wounds, within a few daily applications. EscharEx is an investigational product, currently under a U.S. phase 2 study.

Our third innovative product candidate, MW005, is a topically applied biological drug candidate for the treatment of non-melanoma skin cancers, based on the same API of NexoBrid and EscharEx products, a concentrate of proteolytic enzymes enriched in bromelain. We launched a new clinical development program to evaluate our drug product candidate MW005 in patients with non-melanoma skin cancer. The Clinical development program of MW005 is supported by the results from several toxicological and other preclinical studies, a clinical case series, as well as vast clinical experience from NexoBrid and EscharEx, which share the same active substance.

We manufacture NexoBrid, EscharEx and our product candidates in our state-of-the-art, cGMP-compliant, sterile pharmaceutical products manufacturing facility at our headquarters in Yavne, Israel.

In June 2021, we received a CRL from the FDA stating that our BLA seeking the approval of NexoBrid for eschar removal in adults with deep partial-thickness and/or full-thickness thermal burns was not approved. The FDA identified issues related to the Chemistry, Manufacturing and Controls (“CMC”) section of the BLA and requested additional CMC information; The FDA also stated that inspections of NexoBrid's manufacturing facilities in Israel and Taiwan are required before the FDA can approve the BLA, but it was unable to conduct the required inspections during the current review cycle due to COVID-19 related travel restrictions. In addition, the CRL cited certain observations identified during good clinical practice (GCP) inspections related to the U.S. Phase 3 study (DETECT), and requested that we provide its perspective on the potential impact, if any, of these observations on the efficacy findings in the study. Following a productive Type A meeting conducted with the FDA in October 2021, we gained clarity on a path forward for resubmission of our NexoBrid BLA, which is anticipated in mid-2022.

In July 2021, we announced positive results from our pivotal NexoBrid phase 3 pediatric clinical study (CIDS) for eschar removal of severe thermal burns, including the 12-month safety follow-up. The study met all three primary endpoints with a high degree of statistical significance, as well as certain secondary endpoints. NexoBrid demonstrated a significant reduction in time to achieve complete eschar removal and significant reduction in wound area requiring surgical excision while demonstrating non-inferiority to standard-of-care in quality of scars. In addition, the study showed that NexoBrid was safe and well-tolerated. The long-term follow-up for cosmesis and function, quality of life and safety measurements is ongoing, and data is expected in the first half of 2023.

In February 2022 we announced that the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), part of the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, has expanded its awarded contract with us by providing supplemental funding of $9 million to support the NexoBrid BLA resubmission with the FDA and the ongoing expanded access treatment protocol (NEXT).

In March 2022, we entered into an underwriting agreement with Oppenheimer & Co., Inc., a representative of the several underwriters (the “Underwriters”), relating to the issuance and sale of an aggregate of 5,208,333 of our ordinary shares at a price per share equal to $1.92.  Total gross proceeds of the offering was approximately $10.0 million. The offering closed on March 7, 2022 and we received approximately $8.7 million in net proceeds, after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses.  Certain entities affiliated with CBI purchased approximately $2.8 million of ordinary shares in the offering at the public offering price. The Underwriters received the same underwriting discount on the shares purchased by these entities as they will on any other shares sold to the public in this offering. The securities purchased by these entities are subject to lock-up agreements with the Underwriters. We also granted the Underwriters a 30-day option to purchase up to an additional 781,249 ordinary shares at the public offering price, less underwriting discounts and commissions.

In January 2022, we announced positive topline results from the U.S.phase 2 study of EscharEx for the debridement of venous leg ulcers (VLUs). These topline results demonstrated that the study met its primary endpoint, demonstrating that patients treated with EscharEx had a statistically significant higher incidence of complete debridement compared to the gel vehicle, with a p-value of 0.004 and no safety issues were observed. Patient follow-up is ongoing and additional data, including secondary and exploratory endpoints as well as additional safety measurements, which will allow further evaluation of clinical benefits, is expected in the second quarter of 2022.

In addition, in December 2021, we announced positive initial data from our ongoing open-label, phase 2 pharmacology study of EscharEx in the debridement of VLUs and diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs). Based on this initial data, EscharEx demonstrated safe and effective debridement of lower leg ulcers within a few daily applications. We expect to share the full data set from this study in the first half of 2022.

In July 2021, we initiated a U.S. phase I/II study of MW005 for the treatment of low-risk basal cell carcinoma (BCC). We expect data from the study to be available in the first half of 2022.

NexoBrid, a concentrate of proteolytic enzymes enriched in bromelain, is an easy to use, topically-applied product that removes eschar in four hours without harming the surrounding healthy tissues. Eschar removal is a critical first step in the successful healing of severe burns and chronic and other hard-to-heal wounds. Under existing SOC, burn eschar may be removed either by employing certain existing topical agents that have been found to be minimally effective or that take a significantly longer period of time to work, or by resorting to non-selective surgery, which is traumatic and may result in loss of blood and viable tissue. NexoBrid’s rapid and selective debridement alleviates the known risks associated with eschar, such as infection, eventual sepsis, wound deterioration and consequential scarring, and it allows physicians to reach an informed decision on further treatment at an earlier stage by direct visual assessment of the actual burn depth. Furthermore, NexoBrid minimizes the burden associated with invasive surgical procedures, reduces the need for skin grafting and sacrifice of healthy tissue from donor sites on a patient’s body and generally results in a more favorable overall long-term patient outcome. NexoBrid has been investigated in hundreds of patients across more than 22 countries and four continents in nine completed Phase 2, Phase 3 and post-marketing clinical studies. Over 9,000 burn patients have been treated with NexoBrid in the market since 2013 and the safety and efficacy data reported from post marketing data sources are consistent with the data available from clinical trials and no new safety signals were observed.

There have been hundreds of presentations and several award winning abstracts of NexoBrid in international and national scientific conferences, and NexoBrid has been presented in about 90 peer-reviewed papers, resulting in support of burn specialists and key opinion leaders. Awareness of NexoBrid continues to grow through our marketing efforts in countries where NexoBrid is approved and our and multinational clinical development.

Burns are life threatening and debilitating traumatic injuries causing considerable morbidity and mortality. A burn may result from thermal, electrical or chemical means that destroy the skin to varying depths. According to Critical Care, an international clinical medical journal, burns are also among the most expensive traumatic injuries because of long and costly hospitalization, rehabilitation and wound and scar treatment.

Most burn injuries involve part of or the entire thickness of the skin and in some cases, the deeper subcutaneous fat tissue or underlying structures. The severity of the burn depends on three main factors:

When patients are hospitalized for a severe burn, the first step in the treatment after patient stabilization and resuscitation is usually eschar removal. The eschar is the burned tissue in the wound, which is deprived of blood and isolated from all natural systemic defense mechanisms. Debridement is an essential first step in the treatment of patients with severe burns, allowing for:

In addition to minimizing the possibility of additional complications, once the eschar is removed, a physician may properly diagnose the true extent of the trauma by a direct visual assessment of the clean wound bed. An informed treatment strategy can be decided upon only if the depth of the burn and extent of the tissue damage is known. Diagnosis of burn depth is difficult, especially because the burn commonly changes its appearance during the first days after injury due to burn progression. Burns that are initially difficult to classify due to the presence of eschar are referred to as “indeterminate” burns. This ambiguity can delay the assessment of the burn depth and formulation of proper treatment. Unless the burns are life-threatening, definitive treatment is postponed for several days post-injury until diagnosis is clearer, when burn progression by death of the surrounding and underlying tissue has already occurred and ended. During this delay, local and systemic effects of post-burn inflammation and bacterial contamination can occur. Therefore, earlier, selective eschar removal is essential to prevent eschar-related complications and to allow the physician to reach an informed decision on further treatment.

As demonstrated in our clinical trials, NexoBrid combines the advantages of surgical and non-surgical debridement modalities by providing rapid and effective eschar removal while not harming viable tissues. This allows for earlier direct visual assessment of the burn wound in order to formulate proper treatment.

Severe burns require specialized care in hospitals or burn centers. Approximately 100,000 patients with severe burns are hospitalized every year in the United States and Europe. The prevalence of patients with severe burns is even higher in emerging economies. For example, approximately 400,000 patients are hospitalized every year with burns in India according to a study conducted by IMS Health. The severe burn patients are predominantly treated by specialists in approximately 250 burn centers in Europe and the United States, as well as at burn units of large hospitals in Europe. We believe these patients can benefit from NexoBrid’s effective and selective, non-surgical eschar removal.

In addition to our current marketing of NexoBrid in Europe, we have signed local distribution agreements for distribution of NexoBrid in Europe, Latin America, certain Asia-Pacific countries, members of the Commonwealth of Independent States (“CIS”), and the Middle East and we plan to target additional markets in these territories by leveraging our approved registration file for additional regional marketing authorizations.

In addition to the market opportunities for NexoBrid discussed above, we believe that NexoBrid has the potential to play a critical role in the event of a mass casualty incident (“MCI”), which is generally defined as any incident in which emergency medical services resources, such as personnel and equipment, are overwhelmed by the number and severity of casualties. A variety of public emergencies may give rise to an MCI, such as terrorist attacks, natural disasters, fires and explosions. One example of an MCI is a mass burn casualty disaster, which is defined by the American Burn Association as a catastrophic event in which the number of burn victims exceeds the capacity of the local burn center to provide optimal care. If a significant number of burn victims arrive at a burn center following an event, some victims may go untreated until the bottleneck is resolved. The use of non-surgical means that are capable of providing rapid eschar removal without harming healthy tissues, particularly during public health emergencies, could potentially reduce the time, labor and resource burdens associated with the current standard-of-care, thereby enabling the treatment of more patients. In the event of a mass burn casualty disaster, healthcare professionals can use NexoBrid to begin treatment at the patient’s bedside without the need for a surgical team and facilities. NexoBrid has demonstrated in clinical studies, with statistical significance, its ability to non-surgically and rapidly remove eschar in a single four-hour application. Once the acute treatment has been completed, the wound can be covered with available means and further managed once the MCI is under control and the bottlenecks resolved. NexoBrid has been recognized by BARDA as a medical countermeasure for treatment of burns in the event of a MCI.

In September 2015, we were awarded the First BARDA Contract for treatment of thermal burn injuries, which was valued at up to $112 million. In July 2017 and in May 2019, BARDA expanded its commitment by an aggregate supplemental amount of $41 million. In March 2020, BARDA further expanded its commitment by additional $5.5 million to support emergency readiness for NexoBrid deployment upon request of use of NexoBrid in mass casualty situations and in February 2022 BARDA expanded its awarded contract by providing supplemental funding of $9 million to support the NexoBrid BLA resubmission to the FDA and the continuous expanded access program (collectively the "First BARDA Contract").

The First BARDA Contract is our primary contract with BARDA and relates to the advancement of the development and manufacturing, as well as the procurement of NexoBrid as a medical countermeasure as part of U.S. preparedness for mass casualty events.

Under the First BARDA Contract, BARDA provided technical assistance and a total of up to $91 million in funding for NexoBrid development activities required to achieve U.S. marketing approval from the FDA. These activities include the NexoBrid Phase 3 (DETECT) study and subsequent requirements for BLA submission, the ongoing Phase 3 pediatric (CIDS) study and the NexoBrid expanded access treatment protocol (NEXT). In January 2020, BARDA committed an additional $16.5 million to procure NexoBrid as part of the HHS mission to build national preparedness for public health medical emergencies.  The contract further includes a $10 million option to fund development of other potential NexoBrid indications and an option to procure additional NexoBrid valued at up to $50 million.

In September 2018, we were awarded the second BARDA contract (the "Second BARDA Contract"), which is an additional, separate contract to develop NexoBrid for the treatment of Sulfur Mustard injuries as part of BARDA’s preparedness for mass casualty events. The Second BARDA Contract provides approximately $12 million of funding to support research and development activities up to pivotal studies in animals under the U.S. FDA Animal Rule and contains options for BARDA to provide additional funding of up to $31 million for additional development activities, animal pivotal studies, and the BLA submission for licensure of NexoBrid for the treatment of Sulfur Mustard injuries.

  As of December 31, 2021, the Company has received approximately $70 million in funding in the aggregate, from BARDA under the two contracts, and an additional $14.6 million for procurement of NexoBrid for U.S. emergency preparedness.

Each BARDA contract may be terminated by BARDA at any time at BARDA’s discretion.

NexoBrid, our innovative biopharmaceutical product, has received marketing authorization from the EMA and the Israeli, Argentinean, South Korean, Russian, Peruvian, Chilean, Taiwanese, Ukrainian, Eurasian states and United Arab Emirates Ministries of Health for the removal of eschar in adults with deep partial- and full-thickness thermal burns. The active ingredient of NexoBrid is a concentrate of proteolytic enzymes enriched in bromelain extracted from the pineapple stems. Proteolysis is a breakdown of proteins into smaller building blocks, polypeptides or amino acids. Our research and development strategy is centered around our validated proteolytic enzyme platform technology, focused on next-generation bio-active therapies for burn and wound care and biological medicinal products for tissue repair. Our research and development team further developed and optimized our enzymatic platform technology, which is the basis for NexoBrid, EscharEx and all other pipeline product candidates. One vial of NexoBrid containing 2 grams of concentrate of proteolytic enzymes enriched in bromelain is sufficient for treating a burn wound area of 1% total body surface area (TBSA).

We developed NexoBrid to fulfill the previously unmet need for a non-surgical effective and selective debriding agent that combines the efficacy and speed of surgery with the non-invasiveness of non-surgical methods. NexoBrid enhances the ability of physicians to conduct an earlier direct visual assessment of the burn depth to reach an informed decision on further treatment as well as to reduce the surgical burden and achieve a favorable long-term patient outcome.

NexoBrid has been investigated in hundreds of patients across 22 countries and four continents in nine completed Phase 2 and Phase 3 and post-marketing clinical studies. While we are marketing our product for the removal of eschar in burn wounds under the name “NexoBrid,” in clinical trials the product has been referred to as “Debridase” and “Debrase.”

The following table sets forth information regarding the completed clinical trials of NexoBrid:

The DETECT study is a prospective, multicenter, multinational, randomized, controlled, assessor blinded Phase 3 study, performed in subjects with thermal burns, to evaluate the efficacy and safety of NexoBrid compared to Gel Vehicle and compared to SOC in 175 hospitalized patients with severe burns of up to 30% TBSA randomized in a 3:1:3 ratio, with 12-month and 24-month follow-ups. The study involved 44 burn centers. The study objectives were to evaluate the efficacy and safety of NexoBrid by removing burn eschar earlier and reducing surgical burden and related blood loss in hospitalized patients with severe burns. Complete eschar removal was the primary endpoint of the study and was tested against the Gel Vehicle control arm. The primary analysis was based on whether complete eschar removal was achieved in all target wounds of a patient. The analysis compared all randomized patients to the NexoBrid arm to all randomized patients to the Gel Vehicle control arm. Secondary endpoints included reduction in the need for surgical eschar removal (surgical burden), earlier eschar removal, and blood loss, which were tested against the SOC control arm. All secondary endpoints were analyzed and compared all patients randomized to the NexoBrid arm to all patients randomized to the SOC control arm. The study met its primary endpoint with statistical significance. Patients treated with NexoBrid demonstrated a significantly higher incidence of complete eschar removal compared with patients treated with the Gel Vehicle (NexoBrid: 93.3% (70/75) vs. Gel Vehicle: 4.0% (1/25), p<0.0001¹).

 The study included secondary endpoints that were all met with statistical significance and provided further insight on several efficacy parameters: (i) Patients treated with NexoBrid demonstrated shorter time to achieve complete eschar removal compared with patients treated with SOC (median time - NexoBrid: 1 day vs. SOC: 3.8 days, p<0.0001²); (ii) Patients treated with NexoBrid demonstrated a significantly lower incidence of surgical eschar removal compared with patients treated with SOC (NexoBrid: 4.0% (3/75) vs. SOC: 72.0% (54/75), p<0.0001³); (iii) and Patients treated with NexoBrid incurred significantly lower blood loss during the eschar removal procedure compared with patients treated with SOC (mean volume – NexoBrid: 14.2 ml vs. SOC: 814.5 ml, p<0.00014). In addition, Patients treated with NexoBrid had a non-inferior time to complete wound closure compared with patients treated with SOC (p=0.0003⁵). The study Data Safety Monitoring Board ("DSMB") concluded after all patients had been treated that the overall safety profile of NexoBrid in the study is consistent with the safety data known from previous studies.

The study also serves to address our post approval commitment to EMA. This study is funded by BARDA. See “—BARDA Contracts” above.

The CIDS study is a Phase 3, multicenter, multinational, randomized, controlled, open-label study in children with thermal burns. The study objectives are to evaluate the efficacy and safety of treatment with NexoBrid compared with SOC in hospitalized children with severe thermal burns of 1% to 30% total body surface area (TBSA). We expanded this study also to United States burn centers, following approval of the study protocol by the FDA.  The study is underway in accordance with a study design endorsed by the FDA and the EMA as part of the agreed Pediatric Investigational Plan (“PIP”) to support extension of the indication to pediatric patients. The CIDS study includes pediatric patients of all ages, from newborn to eighteen years of age, offering NexoBrid to this important and sensitive group of patients. The primary endpoints evaluate early eschar removal, surgical burden and cosmesis and function with a 12-month follow-up. 

The study was expanded to include burn centers in the United States following agreement with the FDA, under the same protocol with alignment to the U.S. phase 3 study (DETECT) protocol for adult population. The non-inferiority of cosmesis and function at twelve months and twenty-four months from wound closure were defined as safety measurements. In addition, reduction in surgical need was measured only by reduction in incidence of surgical excision for eschar removal.

In July 2021, we announced positive top-line results, which include acute phase and 12-month follow-up data analysis. The study enrolled 145 pediatric patients, from newborn to eighteen years of age, randomized to either NexoBrid or SOC at a ratio of 1:1, across 36 burn centers worldwide. The study met all three primary endpoints with a high degree of statistical significance, as well as certain secondary endpoints. NexoBrid demonstrated a significant reduction in time to achieve complete eschar removal and significant reduction in wound area requiring surgical excision while demonstrating non-inferiority to standard-of-care in quality of scars. In addition, the study showed that NexoBrid was safe and well-tolerated. The long-term follow-up for cosmesis and function, quality of life and safety measurements is ongoing, and data is expected in the first half of 2023. This study is funded by BARDA.  See “—BARDA Contracts” above.

Our second innovative product candidate, EscharEx, is a bio-active therapeutic product under development for debridement of chronic and other hard-to-heal wounds. EscharEx is complementary to the large number of existing advanced wound healing therapies, which require a clean wound bed in order to heal the wound. EscharEx active substance (API) is a concentrate of proteolytic enzymes enriched in bromelain and as such, benefits from the wealth of existing development data on NexoBrid. The mechanism of action of EscharEx is mediated by the proteolytic enzymes that cleaves and removes the necrotic tissue and prepare the wound bed for healing. In two Phase 2 studies that we conducted, EscharEx well-tolerated and demonstrated safety and efficacy in the debridement of chronic and other hard-to-heal wounds, in a few daily applications. In the U.S, we are conducting a Phase 2 clinical study with the second generation EscharEx, for the treatment of venous leg ulcers (VLUs). The study is built on the positive data from the completed Phase 2 study of the first-generation EscharEx.  The study is designed to assess the safety and efficacy of EscharEx compared to gel vehicle (placebo control) and non-surgical standard-of-care (either enzymatic or autolytic debridement). Topline results announced in January 2022 demonstrated that the study met its primary endpoint, demonstrating that patients treated with EscharEx had a statistically significant higher incidence of complete debridement compared to the gel vehicle, with a p-value of 0.004.

The chronic and other hard-to-heal wound market consists of a broader addressable population of more than 14 million patients in Europe and the United States alone suffering from chronic wounds such as VLUs, Diabetic Foot Ulcers (DFUs), pressure ulcers and additional patients suffering from surgical/traumatic hard-to-heal wounds. Chronic and other hard-to-heal wounds represent a $25 billion burden to the U.S. healthcare system. Chronic and hard-to-heal wounds are caused by impairment in the biochemical and cellular healing processes due to local or systemic conditions and generally can take several weeks to heal, if not longer. Such wounds can lead to significant morbidity, including pain, infection, impaired mobility, hospitalization, reduced productivity, amputation and mortality. In each of the various wound types, the presence of the eschar is a frequent cause for “chronification” of wounds and the removal of eschar is the key step to commence healing. Eschar needs to be removed to prevent further deterioration of the wound that may result in additional adverse patient outcomes. If not effectively treated, these wounds can lead to potentially severe complications including further infection, osteomyelitis, fasciitis, amputation and mortality. Most advanced wound care therapies, including negative pressure wound therapy, such as V.A.C. Therapy, and skin substitutes such as Apligraf and Dermagraft and human amniotic tissue products, are complementary to our lead product candidate, EscharEx, as these products require a clean wound bed to effectively heal a wound. Four common chronic and other hard-to-heal wounds are:

Currently, surgery (sharp debridement) is generally considered a first-line option. Sharp debridement is an effective method to debride a wound, however, requires surgically skilled physicians performing surgery with patients under, anesthesia, which in elderly patients with various co-morbidities is accompanied with a higher risk of local and systemic complications. Surgery may also involve hemorrhage which could be more difficult to control due to a high incidence of use of anticoagulants in this population. Surgery on wounds may very easily become infected with the infection propagating to surrounding soft and boney tissues ending in life threatening major complication or amputation. Very often even minor, limited sharp debridement exposes other sensitive tissue, such as tendons, deep vessels/nerves and bones that may become infected or may be severely damaged, necessitating additional, more extensive debridement or even amputation. Due to these limitations, chronic wounds are treated by conservative methods while autolytic and enzymatic debridement are most commonly-used non-sharp methods. This includes collagenase-based enzymatic debriding ointment, hydrogels and other topical dressings, which require numerous application sessions and a long time (6-8 weeks) to achieve a clean wound bed, if they achieve this at all. Thus, there is an unmet medical need for a non-surgical rapid and effective debridement agent for the outpatient setting, nursery care facilities and patients home. Given high demand for an effective non-surgical debridement technique outside of wound care clinic settings and clinical data generated to date, EscharEx has the potential to expand the current use of enzymatic debridement across all sites of care and achieve substantial market share. As documented in the Phase 2 study described below, EscharEx significantly improved the rate of complete debridement after few once-daily applications, thus potentially facilitating wound debridement without the need for surgery.

EscharEx is a topical agent being developed for debridement of chronic and other hard-to-heal wounds, in order to fulfill an unmet need for a non-surgical rapid and effective debridement mean. EscharEx is based on the same active substance as NexoBrid but differs in other aspects, such as in formulation and presentation. Based on our current pre-clinical studies, the second generation EscharEx demonstrated even higher potency in lower doses, which could further contribute to EscharEx’s efficacy and tolerability. This advanced generation of EscharEx has been designed in accordance with the current treatment workflow and reimbursement programs, providing a non-surgical easy-to-use, potent product for daily application, which we believe will enhance patient compliance and improve quality of care. Based on the feedback received from different stakeholders, we believe that our second generation EscharEx can better address the unmet medical need for a non-surgical rapid and effective product, particularly in the outpatient setting, where the majority of patients are treated, and has a greater potential to achieve substantial market share.

Second generation EscharEx is more differentiated from NexoBrid, which further limits the chances for competition between the two products.

Non-clinical safety studies performed with NexoBrid support EscharEx development, and we have already completed successfully bridging toxicology studies. In a pre-IND meeting the FDA stated that existing toxicology data for EscharEx, including cross-referenced NexoBrid data, could be sufficient to support initiation of clinical studies in the product. The FDA also stated that the second generation EscharEx formulation, manufacturing process and controls were sufficient to initiate dosing in Humans.

We completed a first Phase 2 feasibility study in Israel for chronic and other hard-to-heal wound technology. In January 2017 we completed and announced the final results of a second Phase 2 prospective study in Israel and Europe. In November 2017, we announced the final results of a second cohort of the second Phase 2 study. Based on the completed studies, we believe that our product candidate may be effective for debridement of chronic and other hard-to-heal wounds.

This first Phase 2 feasibility study was conducted in Israel to study the efficacy of our technology on chronic and other hard-to-heal wounds. The study assessed 24 patients at two sites. The results showed that our technology was effective in debriding various chronic and other hard-to-heal wound etiologies, such as DFUs, VLUs, pressure sores and trauma on diseased skin.

This second Phase 2 study was a prospective, controlled, assessor-blinded, randomized, multi-center Phase 2 study in Israel and Europe. The study objectives were to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EscharEx in comparison to the Gel Vehicle¹ at a ratio of 2:1 for the treatment of a variety of chronic and other hard-to-heal wounds, in three etiologies, DFUs, VLUs and post-surgical or traumatic hard-to-heal wounds.

The primary endpoint assessed incidence of complete non-viable tissue removal (debridement) at the end of the debridement period (within up to 10 daily applications) and the secondary endpoints assessed various efficacy and safety endpoints, including wound bed preparation and wound healing.

In January 2017 we reported final results of the first cohort of 73 patients. The average wound age in the EscharEx arm was more than double (72.8 weeks) that of the gel vehicle group (30.8 weeks). The average wound size was 33.6 cm² in the EscharEx arm vs. 25.8 cm² in the gel vehicle group. Despite the larger wounds and that wounds treated with EscharEx were older than wounds treated with gel vehicle (72.8 vs. 30.8 weeks), the study met its primary endpoint. EscharEx demonstrated a statistically significant higher incidence of complete debridement at the end of the debridement period. Patients treated with EscharEx demonstrated a higher incidence of complete debridement (55% or 27/49) compared with patients treated with the hydrogel⁶ vehicle (29% or 7/24) with p=0.047.

Predefined sub-group analyses showed that 50% of patients with DFUs treated with EscharEx (8/16) achieved complete debridement at the end of the debridement period compared with 14.3% of patients with DFUs treated with hydrogel vehicle (1/7). In addition, 62.5% of patients with VLUs treated with EscharEx (10/16) achieved complete debridement at the end of the debridement period compared with 25% of patients with VLUs treated with hydrogel vehicle (2/8). Post hoc analysis showed that 56.3% of patients with DFU or VLU in the EscharEx group had complete debridement at the end of the debridement period compared with 20.0% in hydrogel vehicle group (p=0.028).

The study included secondary endpoints that provide further insight into number of efficacy and safety parameters. The secondary endpoint of time to complete debridement demonstrated a clear trend (p=0.075) that strongly suggests that not only is there a difference in the incidence of debridement, as confirmed by the primary endpoint, but that debridement occurred earlier in the group treated by EscharEx. The advantage in time to complete debridement was corroborated by the statistically significant post hoc result in the subgroup of patients with DFUs or VLUs that were treated with EscharEx (p=0.024).

Post hoc analysis showed that of patients who achieved complete debridement in the EscharEx group, 93% (25/27) completed the debridement within 7 days (4-5 applications on average).

The overall patient demographics were comparable across both arms. No deleterious effect on wound healing was observed and no material differences were found in reported adverse events. The overall safety was comparable between the arms.

After successfully completing the first cohort of the study which included 73 patients recruited in 15 clinical sites, we initiated a second cohort of patients to demonstrate safety and tolerability over extended periods of application to further support the product’s convenient application. In this second cohort, we recruited 38 patients from two etiologies, either DFUs or VLUs, over extended periods of application (24-72 hours) with up to eight applications, randomizing the patients to two study arms EscharEx or gel vehicle at a ratio of 2:1. The second cohort of the study included 38 patients. The primary objective was to assess safety.

EscharEx met its primary safety endpoint in this cohort, and the overall patient demographics and wound baseline characteristics were comparable across the arms in the second cohort. No related systemic adverse events were reported and adverse events related to local application were mild to moderate, reversible and resolved during the trial. Vital signs, pain scores, infection rates, laboratory parameters and blood loss were comparable between the two arms of the trial. Overall, no material safety concerns were identified.

In December 2019, we initiated a U.S. Phase 2 adaptive design clinical study of EscharEx for the treatment of venous leg ulcers (VLUs). The study is a multicenter, prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, adaptive design study, evaluating the safety and efficacy of EscharEx in debridement of VLUs compared to gel vehicle (placebo control) and non-surgical standard-of-care of either enzymatic or autolytic debridement. The study enrolled 120 patients, with 119 treated, at approximately 20 clinical sites, primarily in the United States. Study participants were randomized to either EscharEx, gel vehicle placebo control, or non-surgical standard-of-care, at a ratio of 3:3:2, with a three-month follow-up. The primary endpoint was incidence of complete debridement (non-viable tissue removal), clinically assessed, during the assessment period (up to 8 treatment applications within 14 days), compared to gel vehicle placebo control. Secondary and exploratory endpoints assess time to achieve complete debridement, reduction of pain, reduction of wound area, granulation tissue and quality of life, enabling evaluation of clinical benefits compared to both gel vehicle and non-surgical standard-of-care. Incidence and time to achieve wound closure will be assessed as safety measurements.

In January 2022 we announced positive topline results from this study. These topline results showed that the study met its primary endpoint with high degree of statistical significance, demonstrating that patients treated with EscharEx had a statistically significant higher incidence of complete debridement compared to the gel vehicle. The study randomized 120 patients, of which 119 patients were treated by either EscharEx (n=46), a gel vehicle (n=43), or a non-surgical standard-of-care consisting of either enzymatic or autolytic debridement (n=30). Patients treated with EscharEx demonstrated a statistically significant higher incidence of complete debridement during the 14-day measurement period within up to 8 applications compared to patients treated with gel vehicle (EscharEx: 63% (29/46) vs. gel vehicle: 30% (13/43), p-value=0.004). EscharEx efficacy superiority remained statistically significant compared to gel vehicle also after adjusting for pre-specified covariates ascribed to patient baseline characteristics, wound size and age, regions, and sites. Incidence of complete debridement of the non-surgical standard-of-care arm, during the same 14-day measurement period, was 13% (4/30). In addition, the Independent Data Monitoring Committee reviewed the data of all patients treated and no safety concerns were identified in the study population. EscharEx was well-tolerated and overall safety was comparable between the arms. No differences were found in reported adverse events and no serious adverse event was related to study treatment. Patient baseline characteristics were comparable across all study arms. Patient follow-up is ongoing and additional data, including secondary and exploratory endpoints as well as additional safety measurements, which will allow further evaluation of clinical benefits, is expected in the second quarter of 2022.

In December 2021, we announced positive initial data from seven of the maximum fifteen patients in our ongoing open-label, phase 2 pharmacology study of EscharEx in the debridement of lower leg ulcers (VLUs and DFUs). Based on this initial data, EscharEx demonstrated safe and effective debridement of lower leg ulcers within a few daily applications. In addition, evaluation of wounds’ tissue samples (biopsies) and fluorescence images indicated reduction of biofilm and bacterial load following the treatment with EscharEx. We expect to share the full data set from this study in the first half of 2022.

The development of EscharEx for the debridement of chronic and other hard-to-heal wound indications is in Phase 2 studies, and there is no certainty that EscharEx will achieve all of the objectives of the trials as required or that the FDA will allow at this stage to initiate further studies or that we will successfully complete the development to obtain a marketing authorization for EscharEx. MediWound currently expects to request an end-of-Phase 2 meeting with the FDA in the second half of 2022, to discuss program results and the potential Phase 3 pivotal plan for EscharEx. See “ITEM 3.D. Risk Factors—Development and commercialization of NexoBrid and EscharEx in the United States and our pipeline product candidates worldwide requires successful completion of the regulatory approval process, and may suffer delays or fail.”

 MW005, is a topically applied biological product candidate for the treatment of non-melanoma skin cancers, based on the same active substance of NexoBrid and EscharEx, a concentrate of proteolytic enzymes enriched in bromelain. The clinical development plan of MW005 is supported by the results from several toxicological and other preclinical studies, as well as vast clinical experience from NexoBrid and EscharEx, which share the same active substance. We launched a new clinical program to evaluate our drug product candidate MW005 in patients with non-melanoma skin cancer.

Cancers of the skin are by far the most common of all types of cancer with about approximately 5.4 million basal and squamous cell skin cancers are diagnosed each year in the US. The number of these cancers has been increasing for many years due to combination of better skin cancer detection, people getting more sun exposure, and people living longer.

Basal cell carcinoma is a non-melanoma skin cancer that arises from the basal layer of epidermis and its appendages and is the most diagnosed skin cancer in the US (~4.3 million cases annually).

Under existing standard of care, low-risk patients are treated with tumor resection via either standard surgical excision or Mohs micrographic surgery. Recurrence rates for these sharp methods of tumor removal are low (~5% at 5 years), and procedure is considered straightforward with limited patient downtime or side effects. Topical products (5-FU and Imiquimod) are used primarily in superficial lesions, but have limited use and are reserved for surgery ineligible patients. Drawbacks include longer treatment duration (>6 weeks), low efficacy (~14% at 5 years), and side effects such as scarring, skin-site reactions, and fatigue/flu-like illness. High-risk patients are also primarily treated with surgery; surgery-ineligible patients are treated with oral hedgehog pathway inhibitors, which are effective in the short-term, but have high recurrence rates / safety concerns. There is a need for more effective, safer topical products in low-risk superficial basal cell carcinoma for surgery-ineligible patients (e.g., site of tumor is challenging for excision or may result in cosmetic issues) or for patients for whom surgery is not appropriate (e.g., older / frail patients, or those with challenges in seeking pre and post-surgical appointments) and current topical agents may be avoided due to long treatment durations and because they result in an unpleasant treatment process for patients.

In July 2021, we initiated a U.S. phase I/II study of MW005 for the treatment of low-risk basal cell carcinoma (BCC). The phase I/II open-label, randomized clinical study in BCC is designed to evaluate safety and tolerability of MW005 using different schedules of administration, as well as provide a preliminary evaluation of efficacy as measured by the percentage of target lesion with complete histological clearance. The trial will enroll up to 32 patients, comprised of 2 cohorts of 16 patients each, with histologically confirmed superficial or nodular BCC and will be conducted at three leading clinical centers in the U.S. We expect data to be available in the first half of 2022.

Although we have conducted preclinical trials, the development of MW005 for non-melanoma skin cancer indications is still in its preliminary phase and there is no certainty that it will achieve all the aims of the trials as required and/or successfully complete the approval process for such indication. See “ITEM 3.D. Risk Factors—Development and commercialization of NexoBrid and EscharEx in the United States and our pipeline product candidates worldwide requires successful completion of the regulatory approval process, and may suffer delays or fail.”

Our research and development strategy is centered around our validated proteolytic enzyme platform technology, focused on next-generation protein-based therapies for burn and wound care, and for tissue repair, which underlies NexoBrid and EscharEx, into additional product candidates for high-value indications. For more information regarding our research and development expenses, see “ITEM 5.C. Research and Development, Patents and Licenses, etc.”

We conduct clinical studies and preclinical studies to support the efficacy and safety of our products and their ingredients and to extend and validate their benefits for human health. Preclinical studies allow us to substantiate the safety of our products and obtain preliminarily indications of their pharmacological and safety profile. As of the date hereof, we had conducted more than 50 non-GLP8 and GLP preclinical studies. All pre-clinical safety and toxicology studies were conducted according to the principles of Good Laboratory Practices (“GLP”), and twelve clinical studies, according to the principles of Good Clinical Practices (“GCP”), for NexoBrid, EscharEx and our pipeline product candidates. As a result, we have developed significant experience in planning, designing, executing, analyzing and publishing clinical studies.

Our research and development team manages our clinical studies and coordinates the project planning, trial design, execution, outcome analyses and clinical study report submission. During the design, execution and analyses of our studies, our research and development team consults with key opinion leaders and top-tier consultants in the relevant field of research to optimize both design and execution, as well as to strengthen the scientific, medical and regulatory compliance level of the investigational plan. Our clinical studies have been conducted in collaboration with leading medical and research centers throughout the world.

We operate a manufacturing facility in Yavne, Israel, in a building that we sub-lease from Clal Life Sciences L.P., with 31 employees as of December 31, 2021. This facility allows us to manufacture sterile biopharmaceutical products, such as NexoBrid. The facility meets current cGMP requirements, as certified by each of the EMA, the Israeli Ministry of Health and South Korean ministry of health. Our facility is subject to audits for reassessment of cGMP compliance, which are preformed periodically by regulatory authorities and was re-approved as cGMP-compliant for an additional three years term as of the audit date, until 2023. Additionally, as we seek regulatory approval NexoBrid in the United States the FDA will need to inspect our plant to confirm it meets all regulatory requirements. In addition, other regional applicable authorities may also need to inspect our plant to confirm it meets all regulatory requirements in order to obtain marketing authorization in these jurisdictions. Applicable changes in our production processes for NexoBrid must be approved by the EMA and similar authorities in other jurisdictions.

While we believe that our current manufacturing capacity at the facility is sufficient to meet the expected near-term commercial demand for NexoBrid, we are planning to scale-up the current capacity, subject to BLA approval, in 2023. We expect the cost will be approximately $8-10 million.

The starting material used by us in the manufacturing of NexoBrid and our other product candidates is bromelain SP, which is derived from pineapple plant stems. We have entered into an agreement with CBC, dated January 11, 2001, as amended on February 28, 2010, pursuant to which CBC uses proprietary methods to manufacture bromelain SP and supplies us with this intermediate drug substance in bulk quantities. According to the terms of the agreement, CBC shall not, and shall not permit related companies or a third party to, manufacture, use, supply or sell the raw materials for the use or production of a product directly or indirectly competing with any of our products. Our supply agreement with CBC has no fixed expiration date and can be voluntarily terminated by us, with at least six months’ advance written notice, or by CBC, with at least 24 months’ advance written notice.

Upon obtaining bromelain SP from CBC, we further process it into the drug substance and then into the drug product to finally create the powder form of NexoBrid. The necessary inactive ingredients contained in NexoBrid, or the excipients, are readily available and generally sold to us by multiple suppliers. In addition to this powder, we manufacture a sterile gel substance by combining water for injections produced by us at our facility and additional excipients.

We commercialize globally NexoBrid via multiple sales channels:

 In Europe and Israel, we sell NexoBrid, primarily through our own sales force consisting of a marketing team of specialized and knowledgeable sales representatives in Europe, focusing on leading burn centers and Key Opinion Leaders (KOL) management. We have obtained national reimbursement for NexoBrid in Belgium and Italy and we continue to locally execute our market access strategy for most of Europe to obtain procurement by burn centers and hospitals as part of their budget, or under local, regional or national reimbursement, depending on the specific process required in each country. We believe that additional burn units in large hospitals as well as smaller hospitals will follow the treatment trends once established by the burn centers. See “—Government Legislation and Regulation—Pharmaceutical Coverage, Pricing and Reimbursement.” Furthermore, we are establishing additional distribution channels through local partners to extend outreach in EU (Sweden, Finland, the Baltic states, France, Switzerland (Romandie region), Greece, Malta, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Portugal, the Netherlands and Luxemburg), where NexoBrid is already approved for marketing as part of the European marketing authorization. In addition to receiving marketing authorization for NexoBrid in the European Union, key opinion leaders in the burn care field worldwide are already aware of NexoBrid’s efficiency in removing eschar due to hundreds of scientific presentations and several award winning abstracts at international and national conferences and about 100 peer-reviewed papers.

NexoBrid is currently under registration stage in the U.S., and pursuant to the terms of the License Agreement described below, we will continue to conduct all clinical and other activities described in the development plan to support the BLA resubmission with the FDA under the supervision of a Central Steering Committee comprised of members of each of our Company and Vericel.

We entered into a license agreement (the “License Agreement”) with Vericel pursuant to which we granted Vericel an exclusive license, with the right to grant sublicenses, to develop and commercialize NexoBrid and any improvements of NexoBrid (the “Licensed Product”) in the Territory.

Pursuant to the terms of the License Agreement, Vericel will have exclusive control regarding the commercialization of Licensed Products in the Territory and must use commercially reasonable efforts to commercialize Licensed Products within the Territory. We and Vericel have made customary representations and warranties and have agreed to certain customary covenants, including confidentiality and indemnification.

Within 10 days of signing the License Agreement, Vericel paid us an upfront fee of $17.5 million (the “Upfront Payment”). Vericel is obligated to pay us $7.5 million upon U.S. regulatory approval of the BLA for NexoBrid and up to $125 million upon certain sales milestones. The first sales milestone of $7.5 million is triggered when annual net sales of the Licensed Products in the Territory exceed $75 million.  Vericel is also obligated to pay us tiered royalties on net sales of Licensed Products ranging from mid-high single-digit to mid-teen percentages, subject to certain customary reductions, a percentage of gross profits on committed purchases and a royalty on additional purchases by BARDA. The royalties will expire on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis upon the latest to occur of (i) twelve years following the first commercial sale of such Licensed Product in such country, (ii) the earliest date on which there are no valid claims of MediWound patent rights covering such Licensed Product in such country, and (iii) the expiration of the regulatory exclusivity period for such Licensed Product in such country (the “Royalty Term”). Such royalties are subject to reduction in the event that (a) Vericel must license additional third-party intellectual property in order to develop, manufacture or commercialize a Licensed Product, or (b) biosimilar competition occurs with respect to the Licensed Product in any country within the Territory. After the expiration of the applicable royalties for the Licensed Product in any country within the Territory, the license for such Licensed Product in such country would become a fully paid-up, royalty-free, perpetual and irrevocable license.

The License Agreement expires on the date of expiration of all royalty obligations due under the agreement unless earlier terminated in accordance with its terms. Either party may terminate the agreement upon the failure of the other party to comply with its material obligations under the agreement if that failure is not remedied within certain specified cure periods or in the event of a party’s insolvency. In addition, Vericel may terminate the agreement upon 150 days written notice to us.

On May 6, 2019, concurrently with our entry into the License Agreement, we entered into a supply agreement (the “Supply Agreement”) with Vericel pursuant to which we are obligated to supply Vericel with NexoBrid for sale in the Territory on an exclusive basis for the first five years of the term of the Supply Agreement.  The Supply Agreement requires us to take steps to ensure that our manufacturing capacity meets Vericel’s demand for NexoBrid.  In addition, after the exclusivity period or upon supply failure, Vericel will be permitted to establish an additional or alternate source of supply.

Pursuant to the Supply Agreement, we will supply NexoBrid to Vericel based on Vericel’s fixed orders on a unit price basis.  After a specified period, the unit price, on an annual basis, may be increased based on the United States Producer Price Index for Chemical Manufacturing published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The Supply Agreement’s initial term is five years (the “Initial Term”), with Vericel required to provide us with notice regarding whether it plans to extend the Initial Term for an additional two years by the third anniversary of the Supply Agreement.  After the Initial Term and optional two-year extension, Vericel, at its sole discretion, may choose to extend the Supply Agreement’s term for additional one-year periods for a potential total term of fifteen years.

The Supply Agreement will automatically terminate upon the expiration or termination of the License Agreement.  Either party may terminate the Supply Agreement upon the failure of the other party to comply with its material obligations under the Supply Agreement if such failure is not remedied within certain specified cure periods.  After the Initial Term, Vericel may terminate the Supply Agreement upon 12 months’ prior written notice to us, and we may terminate the Supply Agreement upon 36 months prior written notice to Vericel.

Pursuant to the First BARDA Contract, BARDA has initiated the procurement of NexoBrid valued at $16.5 million, for emergency stockpile as part of the HHS mission to build national preparedness for public health medical emergencies. BARDA purchased inventory is being managed by MediWound under vendor managed inventory. As of December 31, 2021, the Company has received $14.6 million for procurement of NexoBrid for U.S. emergency preparedness.

Under our exclusive license and supply agreements with Vericel, we will equally split the gross profits on the initial procurement and receive a double-digit royalty on any additional future BARDA purchases of NexoBrid. Please see “Vericel License and Supply Agreements” above.

In other international markets, we sell NexoBrid through local distributors with which we have distribution agreements, focusing on Asia Pacific, EMEA, CEE and LATAM. We have signed local distribution agreements for distribution in Argentina, Russia, South Korea, Colombia, Mexico, Peru, Chile, Ecuador, Panama, India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Turkey, Japan, Australia, New-Zealand, Singapore, Ukraine, Taiwan and United Arab Emirates.

Our distributors in Argentina, South Korea, Russia, Peru, Chile, Taiwan, United Arab Emirates and Eurasian countries have obtained marketing authorization. Our additional distributors have filed or are in the process of filing for market authorization in their respective territories and are expected to launch NexoBrid after receipt of local regulatory approval, which may take a year or more to be granted, and, consequently, may occur in certain markets during 2022. We have launched NexoBrid in Argentina, South Korea, Russia, Taiwan, Chile and United Arab Emirates and expect additional launches following receipt of local marketing authorizations. We plan to enter other international markets through collaboration with local distributors and leverage our approved registration file in Europe to obtain regional marketing authorizations.

For a breakdown of our consolidated revenues by geographic markets and by categories of operations for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2021, please see “Item 5.A Operating and Financial Review and Prospects—Operating Results.”

Our intellectual property and proprietary technology are important to the development, manufacture and sale of NexoBrid, EscharEx and our future pipeline product candidates. We seek to protect our intellectual property, core technologies and other know-how through a combination of patents, trademarks, trade secrets, non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements, licenses, assignments of invention and other contractual arrangements with our employees, consultants, partners, suppliers, customers and others. Additionally, we rely on our research and development program, clinical trials, know-how and marketing and distribution programs to advance our products and product candidates. As of December 31, 2021, we had been granted a total of 64 patents and have 27 pending patent applications. The family of patents that covers NexoBrid specifically includes 35 granted patents worldwide. EscharEx is covered by 7 patents and 24 national phase applications.

The main patents for our proteolytic enzyme technology which underlies NexoBrid, EscharEx and our current pipeline product candidates have been issued in Europe, the United States and other international markets. Our patents which cover NexoBrid claim specific mixtures of proteolytic enzymes, methods of producing such mixtures and methods of treatment using such mixtures. Although the protection achieved is significant for NexoBrid, EscharEx and our pipeline product candidates, when looking at our patents’ ability to block competition, the protection offered by our patents may be, to some extent, more limited than the protection provided by patents which claim chemical structures which were previously unknown. Absent patent-term extensions, the NexoBrid patents are nominally set to expire in 2025 and in 2029 in the United States. The NexoBrid patents issued in Europe and in other foreign jurisdictions are nominally set to expire in 2025. The patents and the national phase applications relating to EscharEx, if the national phase applications are granted, will expire on January 30, 2037, absent any patent-term adjustment and/or extensions.

While our policy is to obtain patents by application, license or otherwise, to maintain trade secrets and to seek to operate without infringing on the intellectual property rights of third parties, technologies related to our business have been rapidly developing in recent years. Additionally, patent applications that we may file or license from third parties may not result in the issuance of patents, and our issued patents and any issued patents that we may receive in the future may be challenged, invalidated or circumvented. For example, we cannot predict the extent of claims that may be granted or enforceable in our patents nor can we be certain of the priority of inventions covered by pending third‑party patent applications filed in the U.S. If third parties prepare and file patent applications that also claim technology or therapeutics to which we have rights, we may have to participate in proceedings to determine priority of invention, which could result in substantial costs to us, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us. Moreover, because of the extensive time required for clinical development and regulatory review of a product we may develop, it is possible that, before NexoBrid can be commercialized in additional jurisdictions and/or before any of our future products can be commercialized, related patents will expire a short period following commercialization, thereby reducing the advantage of such patent. Loss or invalidation of certain of our patents, or a finding of unenforceability or limited scope of certain of our intellectual property rights, could have a material adverse effect on us. See “ITEM 3.D. Risk Factors — Our success depends in part on our ability to obtain and maintain protection for the intellectual property relating to, or incorporated into, our technology and products.”

In addition to patent protection, we also rely on trade secrets, including unpatented know‑how, technology innovation, drawings, technical specifications and other proprietary information in attempting to develop and maintain our competitive position. We also rely on protection available under trademark laws, and we currently hold various registered trademarks, including “MediWound,” “NexoBrid” and “EscharEx” in various jurisdictions, including the United States, the European Union and Israel.

In September 2000, we signed an exclusive license agreement, as amended in June 2007, with Mark Klein, a third party, for use of certain patents and intellectual property (the “Klein License Agreement”). Under the Klein License Agreement, we received an exclusive license to use the third party’s patents and intellectual property to develop, manufacture, market and commercialize NexoBrid and its pipeline product candidates for the treatment of burns and other wounds. The claims of such patents are directed to a process of preparing a mixture of escharase and proteolytic enzymes and cover the underlying proteolytic mixture of escharase and proteolytic enzymes prepared by that specific process. Pursuant to the Klein License Agreement, we are obligated to keep accounting records related to the sales of NexoBrid and its pipeline product candidates and pay royalties as discussed below. The Klein License Agreement may be terminated by Mark Klein, subject to notice and dispute resolution provisions of the Klein License Agreement, in the event of our breach, bankruptcy petition, insolvency or failure to achieve a development milestone within six months of a target date. We have already achieved all development milestones under the Klein License Agreement.

In consideration for the Klein License Agreement, we paid an aggregate amount of $1.0 million following the achievement of certain development milestones. In addition, we undertook to pay royalties of 1.5‑2.5% from revenues, 10% of royalties received from sublicensing and 2% of lump‑sum payments received from sublicensing up to $1 million and 4% above $1 million, in each case relating to products based on the licensed patents and intellectual property, for a term of 10‑15 years, as applicable, from the date of the first commercial delivery in a major country. In addition, under the Klein License Agreement, we agreed to pay a one‑time lump‑sum amount of $1.5 million upon reaching aggregate revenues of $100 million from the sale of such products.

NexoBrid received orphan drug status in the European Union on July 31, 2002 and in the United States on August 20, 2003 for debridement of deep partial‑ and full‑thickness burns in hospitalized patients. In the United States and the European Union, a sponsor that develops an orphan drug has marketing exclusivity for seven years post‑approval by the FDA and for ten years post‑approval by the EMA, respectively. The exclusive marketing rights in both regions are subject to certain exceptions, including the development of a clinically significant benefit over the prevalent SOC. Once the market exclusivity for our orphan indication expires in a given jurisdiction, subject to other protections such as patents, we could face competition from other companies that may attempt to develop other products for the same indication.

The medical, biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are intensely competitive and subject to significant technological change and changes in practice. While we believe that our innovative technology, knowledge, experience and scientific resources provide us with competitive advantages, we may face competition from many different sources with respect to NexoBrid, EscharEx, MW005 and our existing pipeline product candidates or any product candidates that we may seek to develop or commercialize in the future. Possible competitors may include medical practitioners, pharmaceutical and wound care companies, academic and medical institutions, governmental agencies and public and private research institutions, among others. Any product that we successfully develop and commercialize will compete with existing therapies and new therapies that may become available in the future.

In addition, we face competition from the current SOC. The current SOC for eschar removal in severe burns is surgery, where eschar removal can be performed by tangential excision, dermabrasion or hydro jet, or non‑surgical alternatives, such as applying topical medications to the eschar to facilitate the natural healing process. Consequently, we face competition from traditional surgical procedures and topical agents. However, based on our clinical trials, we believe that NexoBrid has a sustainable competitive advantage over the current non‑surgical alternatives and is less invasive than surgery in removing eschar in patients with burn wounds. See “—NexoBrid and Our Clinical History” for the results of our clinical trials.

Although we are in the clinical and preclinical phases for our pipeline product candidates for debridement of chronic and other hard‑to‑heal wounds and treatment of low risk basal cell carcinoma and connective tissue disorders and other indications, respectively, if one of our pipeline product candidates receives approval in the future, we would compete with traditional surgery and existing non‑surgical and other treatments. In chronic and other hard‑to‑heal wounds, we expect to face competition from current standard of care for debridement by sharp debridement or from the current non-surgical standard of care, either enzymatic debridement, primarily Smith & Nephew Plc’s Santyl, a collagenase-based product indicated for debriding chronic dermal ulcers and severely burned areas or autolytic debridement.

The current standard of care for treatment of low risk basal cell carcinoma, is surgical excision. In superficial basal cell carcinoma and inoperable nodular basal cell carcinoma, we expect to face competition from current topical applications such as imiquimod and 5FU.

In addition to the currently available products, other products may be introduced to debride chronic and other hard‑to‑heal wounds or treat superficial and nodular basal cell carcinoma and connective tissue disorders during the time that we engage in necessary development. Accordingly, if one of our pipeline product candidates is approved, our main challenge in the market would be to educate physicians seeking alternatives to surgery to use our product instead of already existing treatments. While we are still in the development stages, based on our studies, we believe that our pipeline product candidates will be more effective than the current non‑surgical alternatives and less invasive than surgery in removing eschar in chronic and other hard‑to‑heal wounds or tumor resection and may be comparable or perhaps better than currently available treatments for connective tissue disorders.

Our business is subject to extensive government regulation. Regulation by governmental authorities in the United States, the European Union and other jurisdictions is a significant factor in the development, manufacture and marketing of NexoBrid and in ongoing research and development activities.

The approval process of medicinal products in the European Union generally involves satisfactorily completing each of the following:

In order to assess the potential safety and efficacy of a product, tests include laboratory evaluations of product characterization, analytical tests and controls, as well as studies to evaluate toxicity and pharmacological effects in animal studies. The conduct of the preclinical tests and formulation of the compounds for testing must comply with the relevant E.U. regulations and requirements. The results of such tests, together with relevant manufacturing control information and analytical data, are submitted as part of the CTA. Non-clinical studies are performed to demonstrate the health or environmental safety of new biological substances. Non-clinical studies must be conducted in compliance with the principles of good laboratory practice (“GLP”) as set forth in EU Directive 2004/10/EC. In particular, non-clinical studies, both in vitro and in vivo, must be planned, performed, monitored, recorded, reported and archived in accordance with the GLP principles, which define a set of rules and criteria for a quality system for the organizational process and the conditions for non-clinical studies. These GLP standards reflect the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development requirements.

Clinical drug development is often described as consisting of four temporal phases (Phase 1‑4). See, for example, the EMA’s note for guidance on general considerations for clinical trials (CPMP/ICH/291/95).

Studies in Phase 4 are all studies other than routine surveillance performed after drug approval and are related to the approved indication.

The phase of development provides an inadequate basis for classification of clinical trials because one type of trial may occur in several phases. The phase concept is a description, not a set of requirements. The temporal phases do not imply a fixed order of studies since for some drugs in a development plan the typical sequence will not be appropriate or necessary.

Clinical trials of medicinal products in the EU must be conducted in accordance with EU and national regulations and the International Conference on Harmonization (“ICH”) guidelines on good clinical practices (“GCP”) as well as the applicable regulatory requirements and the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki. If the sponsor of the clinical trial is not established within the EU, it must appoint an EU entity to act as its legal representative. The sponsor must take out a clinical trial insurance policy, and in most EU member states, the sponsor is liable to provide ‘no fault’ compensation to any study subject injured in the clinical trial.

The regulatory landscape related to clinical trials in the EU has been subject to recent changes. The EU Clinical Trials Regulation (“CTR”) which was adopted in April 2014 and repeals the EU Clinical Trials Directive, became applicable on January 31, 2022. Unlike directives, the CTR is directly applicable in all EU member states without the need for member states to further implement it into national law. The CTR notably harmonizes the assessment and supervision processes for clinical trials throughout the EU via a Clinical Trials Information System, which contains a centralized EU portal and database.

While the Clinical Trials Directive required a separate CTA to be submitted in each member state, to both the competent national health authority and an independent ethics committee, much like the FDA and IRB respectively, the CTR introduces a centralized process and only requires the submission of a single application to all member states concerned. The CTR allows sponsors to make a single submission to both the competent authority and an ethics committee in each member state, leading to a single decision per member state. The CTA must include, among other things, a copy of the trial protocol and an investigational medicinal product dossier containing information about the manufacture and quality of the medicinal product under investigation. The assessment procedure of the CTA has been harmonized as well, including a joint assessment by all member states concerned, and a separate assessment by each member state with respect to specific requirements related to its own territory, including ethics rules. Each member state’s decision is communicated to the sponsor via the centralized EU portal. Once the CTA is approved, clinical study development may proceed.

The CTR foresees a three-year transition period. The extent to which ongoing and new clinical trials will be governed by the CTR varies. For clinical trials whose CTA was made under the Clinical Trials Directive before January 31, 2022, the Clinical Trials Directive will continue to apply on a transitional basis for three years. Additionally, sponsors may still choose to submit a CTA under either the Clinical Trials Directive or the CTR until January 31, 2023 and, if authorized, those will be governed by the Clinical Trials Directive until January 31, 2025. By that date, all ongoing trials will become subject to the provisions of the CTR.

We initiated a PIP study in November 2014.

On January 26, 2007, Regulation (EC) 1901/2006 came into force with its primary purpose being the improvement of the health of children without subjecting children to unnecessary trials, or delaying the authorization of medicinal products for use in adults. The regulation established the Pediatric Committee (“PDCO”), which is responsible for coordinating the EMA’s activities regarding pharmaceutical drugs for children. The PDCO’s main role is to determine which studies the applicant needs to perform in the pediatric population as part of the PIP.

All applications for marketing authorization for new pharmaceutical products that were not authorized in the EU prior to January 26, 2007 must include the results of studies carried out in children of different ages. The PDCO determines the requirements and procedures of such studies, describing them in a PIP. This requirement also applies when a company wants to add a new indication, pharmaceutical form or route of administration for a medicine that is already authorized. The PDCO can grant deferrals for some medicines, allowing a company to delay development of the medicine in children until there is enough information to demonstrate its effectiveness and safety in adults. The PDCO can also grant waivers when development of a medicine in children is not needed or is not appropriate, such as for diseases that only affect the elderly population.

Before an MAA can be filed, or an existing marketing authorization can be amended, the EMA confirms that the applicant complied with the studies’ requirements and measures listed in the PIP. Since the regulation became effective, several incentives for the development of medicines for children become available in the European Union, including:

In November 2021, we received positive scientific advice from the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) related to the pediatric label extension for NexoBrid. EMA’s CHMP agreed to assess a potential pediatric label extension on NexoBrid for the treatment of thermal burns, based on the available safety and efficacy results of the pivotal Phase 3 pediatric clinical study with its 12-month follow-up, and that the long-term follow up data are likely to be supportive data. Based on the feedback, the Company anticipates submitting a pediatric label extension request in the first half of 2022.

Authorization to market a product in the EU member states proceeds under one of four procedures: a centralized authorization procedure, a mutual recognition procedure, a decentralized procedure or a national procedure. Marketing authorization may be granted only to an applicant established in the European Union. Through our wholly‑owned German subsidiary, we received approval for NexoBrid pursuant to the centralized authorization procedure.

The centralized procedure provides for the grant of a single marketing authorization that is valid throughout the EU and the European Economic Area (“EEA”) countries, and including Norway, Iceland and Lichtenstein. The centralized procedure is compulsory for medicines produced by certain biotechnological processes, products designated as orphan medicinal products, advanced therapy medicinal products (“ATMPs”) and products with a new active substance indicated for the treatment of certain diseases, and is optional for products which constitute a significant therapeutic, scientific, or technical innovation or for which a centralized process is in the interest of patients. Products that have received orphan designation in the EU, such as NexoBrid, will qualify for this centralized procedure, under which each product’s MAA is submitted to the EMA. Under the centralized procedure in the European Union, the maximum time frame for the evaluation of an MAA by the EMA is 210 days (excluding clock stops, when additional written or oral information is to be provided by the applicant in response to questions asked by the Committee of Medicinal Products for Human Use).

In general, if the centralized procedure is not followed, there are three alternative procedures where applications are filed with one or more members state medicines regulators, each of which will grant a national marketing authorization:

It is not always possible for applicants to follow the national procedure. In the case of medicinal products in the category for which the centralized authorization procedure is compulsory, that procedure must be followed. In addition, the national procedure is not available in the case of medicinal product dossiers where the same applicant has already obtained marketing authorization in one of the other European Union member state or has already submitted an application for marketing authorization in another member state and the application is under consideration. In the latter case, applicants must follow a mutual recognition procedure.

After a drug has been authorized and launched, it is a condition of maintaining the marketing authorization that all aspects relating to its quality, safety and efficacy must be kept under review. Sanctions may be imposed for failure to adhere to the conditions of the marketing authorization. In extreme cases, the authorization may be revoked, resulting in withdrawal of the product from sale.

Marketing authorization is valid for an initial five‑year period and may be renewed thereafter on the basis of a re‑evaluation of the risk‑benefit balance by the EMA or by the competent authority of the authorizing member state. To this end, the marketing authorization holder shall provide the EMA or other applicable competent authority a consolidated version of the file in respect of quality, safety and efficacy, including all variations introduced since the marketing authorization was granted, at least six months before the end of the initial five‑year period. Once renewed, the marketing authorization is valid for an unlimited period, unless the EMA or other applicable competent authority decides, on justified grounds relating to pharmacovigilance, to proceed with one additional five‑year renewal. Any authorization which is not followed by the actual placing of the drug on the E.U. market (in case of centralized procedure) or on the market of the authorizing member state within three years after authorization shall cease to be valid. On November 2017, the European Commission granted a five‑year renewal of our NexoBrid marketing authorization, and we plan to file for renewal during 2022.

On July 31, 2002, NexoBrid received orphan drug status in the European Union, and on December 20, 2012, the EMA confirmed NexoBrid’s designation as an orphan drug for marketing authorization.

In the EU, the Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products assesses orphan drug designation. The criteria for designating an “orphan medicinal product” in the EU are similar in principle to those in the United States.  A medicinal product can be designated as an orphan if its sponsor can establish that (1) the product is intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life threatening or chronically debilitating condition; (2) either (a) such condition affects not more than five in 10,000 persons in the EU when the application is made, or (b) the product, without the benefits derived from the orphan status, would not generate sufficient return in the EU to justify the necessary investment; and (3) there exists no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment of the condition in question that has been authorized for marketing in the EU or, if such method exists, the product will be of significant benefit to those affected by that condition.

In the EU, orphan drug designation also entitles a party to financial incentives such as reduction of fees or fee waivers and ten years of market exclusivity following drug or biological product approval. This period may be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, the orphan drug designation criteria are no longer met, including where it is shown that the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity or a safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior product is available. Granting of an authorization for another similar orphan medicinal product where another product has market exclusivity can happen at any time if: (i) the second applicant can establish that its product, although similar to the authorized product, is safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior, (ii) inability of the applicant  to supply sufficient quantities of the orphan medicinal product or (iii) where the applicant consents to a second orphan medicinal product application. A company may voluntarily remove a product from the orphan register.

Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process.

Without prejudice to the law on the protection of industrial and commercial property, some marketing authorizations benefit from an “8+2(+1)” year period of regulatory protection. During the first eight years from the grant of the innovator company’s marketing authorization, data exclusivity applies. If granted, the data exclusivity period prevents generic or biosimilar applicants from relying on the pre-clinical and clinical trial data contained in the dossier of the reference product when applying for a generic or biosimilar MA in the EU during a period of eight years from the date on which the reference product was first authorized in the EU. After the eight years have expired, a generic company can make use of the preclinical and clinical trial data of the originator in their regulatory applications but still cannot market their product until the end of 10 years. An additional one year of market exclusivity can be obtained if, during the first eight years of those 10 years, the marketing approval holder obtains an approval for one or more new therapeutic indications which, during the scientific evaluation prior to their approval, are determined to bring a significant clinical benefit in comparison with existing therapies. Under the current rules, a third party may reference the preclinical and clinical data of the reference product beginning eight years after first approval, but the third party may market a generic version only after 10 (or 11) years have lapsed.

Additional data protection can be applied for when an applicant has complied with all requirements as set forth in an approved PIP.

Similar to the United States, both marketing authorization holders and manufacturers of medicinal products are subject to comprehensive regulatory oversight by the EMA, the European Commission and/or the competent regulatory authorities of the member states. The holder of a marketing authorization must establish and maintain a pharmacovigilance system and appoint an individual qualified person for pharmacovigilance who is responsible for oversight of that system. Key obligations include expedited reporting of suspected serious adverse reactions and submission of periodic safety update reports (“PSURs”).

All new MAA must include a risk management plan (“RMP”) describing the risk management system that the company will put in place and documenting measures to prevent or minimize the risks associated with the product. The regulatory authorities may also impose specific obligations as a condition of the marketing authorization. Such risk-minimization measures or post-authorization obligations may include additional safety monitoring, more frequent submission of PSURs, or the conduct of additional clinical trials or post-authorization safety studies.

Failure to comply with the aforementioned EU and member state laws may result in administrative, civil or criminal penalties. These penalties could include delays or refusal to authorize the conduct of clinical trials, or to grant marketing authorization, product withdrawals and recalls, product seizures, suspension, withdrawal or variation of the marketing authorization, total or partial suspension of production, distribution, manufacturing or clinical trials, operating restrictions, injunctions, suspension of licenses, fines and criminal penalties.

The aforementioned EU rules are generally applicable in the EEA.

The United Kingdom (“UK”) left the EU on January 31, 2020, following which existing EU medicinal product legislation continued to apply in the United Kingdom during the transition period under the terms of the EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement. The transition period, which ended on December 31, 2020, maintained access to the EU single market and to the global trade deals negotiated by the EU on behalf of its members. The transition period provided time for the UK and EU to negotiate a framework for partnership for the future, which was then crystallized in the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (“TCA”) and became effective on the January 1, 2021. The TCA includes specific provisions concerning pharmaceuticals, which include the mutual recognition of GMP inspections of manufacturing facilities for medicinal products and GMP documents issued, but does not foresee wholesale mutual recognition of UK and EU pharmaceutical regulations.

EU laws which have been transposed into UK law through secondary legislation continue to be applicable as “retained EU law”. However, new legislation such as the EU CTR or in relation to orphan medicines will not be applicable. The UK government has passed a new Medicines and Medical Devices Act 2021, which introduces delegated powers in favour of the Secretary of State or an ‘appropriate authority’ to amend or supplement existing regulations in the area of medicinal products and medical devices. This allows new rules to be introduced in the future by way of secondary legislation, which aims to allow flexibility in addressing regulatory gaps and future changes in the fields of human medicines, clinical trials and medical devices.

As of January 1, 2021, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (“MHRA”) is the UK’s standalone medicines and medical devices regulator. As a result of the Northern Ireland protocol, different rules will apply in Northern Ireland than in England, Wales, and Scotland, together, Great Britain (“GB”); broadly, Northern Ireland will continue to follow the EU regulatory regime, but its national competent authority will remain the MHRA. The MHRA has published a guidance on how various aspects of the UK regulatory regime for medicines will operate in GB and in Northern Ireland following the expiry of the Brexit transition period on December 31, 2020. The guidance includes clinical trials, importing, exporting, and pharmacovigilance and is relevant to any business involved in the research, development, or commercialization of medicines in the UK. The new guidance was given effect via the Human Medicines Regulations (Amendment etc.) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019 (the “Exit Regulations”).

The MHRA has introduced changes to national licensing procedures, including procedures to prioritize access to new medicines that will benefit patients, including a 150-day assessment and a rolling review procedure. All existing EU MAs for centrally authorized products were automatically converted or grandfathered into UK MAs, effective in GB (only), free of charge on January 1, 2021, unless the MA holder chooses to opt-out. After Brexit, companies established in the UK cannot use the centralized procedure and instead must follow one of the UK national authorization procedures or one of the remaining post-Brexit international cooperation procedures to obtain an MA to commercialize products in the UK. The MHRA may rely on a decision taken by the an Commission on the approval of a new (centralized procedure) MA when determining an application for a GB authorization; or use the MHRA’s decentralized or mutual recognition procedures which enable MAs approved in EU member states (or Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway) to be granted in GB.

There will be no pre-MA orphan designation. Instead, the MHRA will review applications for orphan designation in parallel to the corresponding MA application. The criteria are essentially the same, but have been tailored for the market, i.e., the prevalence of the condition in GB, rather than the EU, must not be more than five in 10,000. Should an orphan designation be granted, the period or market exclusivity will be set from the date of first approval of the product in GB.

Numerous state, federal and foreign laws, regulations, and standards govern the collection, use, access to, confidentiality and security of health-related and other personal information, and could apply now or in the future to our operations or the operations of our partners. In the United States, numerous federal and state laws and regulations, including data breach notification laws, health information privacy and security laws and consumer protection laws and regulations govern the collection, use, disclosure, and protection of health-related and other personal information. In addition, certain laws govern the privacy and security of personal data, including health-related data in the EU/EEA and in other foreign jurisdictions. For example, the GDPR imposes strict requirements for processing the personal data of individuals within the EEA. Companies that must comply with the GDPR face increased compliance obligations and risk, including more robust regulatory enforcement of data protection requirements and potential fines for noncompliance of up to €20 million or 4% of the annual global revenues of the noncompliant company, whichever is greater. Further, from January 1, 2021, companies have had to comply with the GDPR and also the UK GDPR, which, together with the amended UK Data Protection Act 2018, retains the GDPR in UK national law. The UK GDPR mirrors the fines under the GDPR, i.e., fines up to the greater of €20 million (£17.5 million) or 4% of global turnover. Privacy and security laws, regulations, and other obligations are constantly evolving, may conflict with each other to complicate compliance efforts, and can result in investigations, proceedings, or actions that lead to significant civil and/or criminal penalties and restrictions on data processing.

The manufacturing of authorized drugs, for which a separate manufacturer’s license is mandatory, must be conducted in strict compliance with the EMA’s cGMP requirements and comparable requirements of other regulatory bodies, which mandate the methods, facilities and controls used in manufacturing, processing and packing of drugs to assure their safety and proper identification. The EMA monitors compliance with its GMP requirements through mandatory registration of facilities and inspections of those facilities. The EMA may have a coordinating role for these inspections while the responsibility for carrying them out rests with the competent authority of the member state under whose responsibility the manufacturer falls. Failure to comply with these requirements could interrupt supply and result in delays, unanticipated costs and lost revenues, and could subject the applicant to potential legal or regulatory action, including but not limited to warning letters, suspension of manufacturing, seizure of product, injunctive action or possible civil and criminal penalties. In January 2013, the EU and Israel signed the Protocol on Conformity Assessment and Acceptance of Industrial Products (the “ACAA”), which covers medicinal products. The ACAA provides for mutual recognition of the conclusions of inspections of compliance of manufacturers and importers with the principles and guidelines of EU GMP and equivalent Israeli cGMP. Certification of the conformity of each batch to its specifications by either the importer or the manufacturer established in Israel or in the EU shall be recognized by the other party without re‑control at import from one party to the other.

The marketing and promotion of authorized drugs, including industry‑sponsored continuing medical education and advertising directed toward the prescribers of drugs and/or the general public, are strictly regulated in the European Union, notably under Directive 2001/83 and subject to laws concerning promotion of medicinal products, interactions with physicians, misleading and comparative advertising and unfair commercial practices. The applicable legislation aims to ensure that information provided by holders of marketing authorizations regarding their products is truthful, balanced and accurately reflects the safety and efficacy claims authorized by the EMA or by the applicable national authority of the authorizing member state. Direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription medicines is also prohibited in the EU. Although general requirements for advertising and promotion of medicinal products are established under EU directives, the details are governed by regulations in each member state and can differ from one country to another. Failure to comply with these requirements can result in adverse publicity, warning letters, mandated corrective advertising and potential civil and criminal penalties.

In addition to E.U. regulations, NexoBrid is an investigational drug in the United States and is therefore subject to various U.S. regulations. In the United States, the FDA regulates biologics under the Federal, Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”), the Public Health Service Act, and their respective implementation regulations. On March 24, 2011, the FDA classified NexoBrid as a biological product. Biologics require the submission of a BLA and licensure by the FDA prior to being marketed in the United States. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations requires the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Failure to comply with the applicable U.S. requirements at any time during the product development process, approval process or after approval may subject an applicant to a variety of administrative or judicial sanctions as well as enforcement actions brought by the FDA, the U.S. Department of Justice or other governmental entities. Possible sanctions may include the FDA’s refusal to approve pending BLAs or supplements, withdrawal of an approval, imposition of a clinical hold, issuance of warning letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, restitution, disgorgement and civil or criminal penalties.

The process required by the FDA prior to marketing and distributing a biologic in the United States generally involves the following:

Preclinical studies include laboratory evaluation of product chemistry, toxicity and formulation, as well as animal studies to assess the potential safety and efficacy of the product candidate. Preclinical safety tests must be conducted in compliance with FDA regulations regarding good laboratory practices. The results of the preclinical tests, together with manufacturing information and analytical data, are submitted to the FDA as part of an IND which must become effective before clinical trials may commence. Some preclinical testing may continue even after the IND is submitted.

Clinical trials involve the administration of an investigational product to human subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators in accordance with GCP requirements, which include, among other things, the requirement that all research subjects provide their informed consent in writing before their participation in any clinical trial. Clinical trials are conducted under written study protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the study, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. A protocol for each clinical trial and any subsequent protocol amendments must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. An IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless before that time the FDA raises concerns or questions related to a proposed clinical trial and places the trial on clinical hold. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin.

In addition, an IRB representing each institution participating in the clinical trial must review and approve the plan for any clinical trial before it commences at that institution, and the IRB must conduct continuing review and reapprove the study at least annually. The IRB must review and approve, among other things, the study protocol and informed consent information to be provided to study subjects. An IRB must operate in compliance with FDA regulations. Information about certain clinical trials must be submitted within specific timeframes to the National Institutes of Health for public dissemination on their website, ClinicalTrials.gov.

For purposes of BLA approval, clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases, which may overlap or be combined. In the United States, the three phases are generally described as follows:

In some cases, the FDA may require, or companies may voluntarily pursue, additional clinical trials after a product is approved to gain more information about the product. These so-called Phase 4 studies may be made a condition to approval of the BLA.

Progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials must be submitted at least annually to the FDA and more frequently if serious adverse events occur. Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials may not be completed successfully within any specified period, or at all. Furthermore, the FDA or the sponsor may suspend or terminate a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research subjects are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an IRB can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical trial at its institution if the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements or if the drug has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients.

The results of the preclinical studies and clinical trials, together with other detailed information, including information on the manufacture, control and composition of the product, are submitted to the FDA as part of a BLA requesting approval to market the product candidate for a proposed indication. Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA), as amended, applicants are required to pay user fees to the FDA for reviewing a BLA. These user fees, as well as the annual program fees required for approved products, can be substantial. Each BLA submitted to the FDA for approval is typically reviewed for administrative completeness and reviewability within 60 days following submission of the application. If found complete, the FDA will “file” the BLA, which triggers a full review of the application. The FDA may refuse to file any BLA that it deems incomplete or not properly reviewable at the time of submission. The FDA’s established goals are to review and act on standard applications within ten months after it accepts the application for filing, or, if the application qualifies for priority review, six months after the FDA accepts the application for filing. In both standard and priority reviews, the review process is often significantly extended by FDA requests for additional information or clarification. The FDA reviews a BLA to determine, among other things, whether a product is safe, pure and potent and the facility in which it is manufactured, processed, packed, or held meets standards designed to assure the product’s continued safety, purity and potency. The FDA may convene an advisory committee to provide clinical insight on application review questions.

Before approving a BLA, the FDA generally inspects the facilities at which the product is manufactured or facilities that are significantly involved in the product development and distribution process, and will not approve the product unless cGMP compliance is satisfactory. Additionally, before approving a BLA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCP. If the FDA determines that the application, manufacturing process or manufacturing facilities are not acceptable, it will outline the deficiencies in the submission and often will request additional testing or information. Notwithstanding the submission of any requested additional information, the FDA ultimately may decide that the application does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval.  After the FDA evaluates a BLA and conducts inspections of manufacturing facilities where the investigational product will be produced, the FDA may issue an approval letter or a Complete Response letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the product with specific prescribing information for specific indications. A Complete Response letter will describe all of the deficiencies that the FDA has identified in the BLA, except that where the FDA determines that the data supporting the application are inadequate to support approval, the FDA may issue the Complete Response letter without first conducting required inspections, testing submitted product lots, and/or reviewing proposed labeling. In issuing the Complete Response letter, the FDA may recommend actions that the applicant might take to place the BLA in condition for approval, including requests for additional information or clarification.

The FDA may deny approval of a BLA if applicable statutory or regulatory criteria are not satisfied, or may require additional testing or information, which can delay the approval process. FDA approval of any application may include many delays or may never be granted. If a product is approved, the approval will impose limitations on the indicated uses for which the product may be marketed, will require that warning statements be included in the product labeling, may impose additional warnings to be specifically highlighted in the labeling (e.g., a Black Box Warning), which can significantly affect promotion and sales of the product, may require that additional studies be conducted following approval as a condition of the approval and may impose restrictions and conditions on product distribution, prescribing or dispensing. For example, the FDA may approve the BLA with a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, or REMS, to ensure the benefits of the product outweigh its risks. A REMS is a safety strategy to manage a known or potential serious risk associated with a product and to enable patients to have continued access to such medicines by managing their safe use. A REMS program may be required to include various elements, such as a medication guide or patient package insert, a communication plan to educate healthcare providers of the drug’s risks, or other elements to assure safe use, such as limitations on who may prescribe or dispense the drug, dispensing only under certain circumstances, special monitoring and the use of patient registries.

Once a product is approved, marketing the product for other indicated uses or making certain manufacturing or other changes requires FDA review and approval of a supplemental BLA or a new BLA, which may require additional clinical data. In addition, further post‑marketing testing and surveillance to monitor the safety or efficacy of a product may be required. Also, product approvals may be withdrawn if compliance with regulatory standards is not maintained or if safety or manufacturing problems occur following initial marketing. In addition, new government requirements may be established that could delay or prevent regulatory approval of our product candidates under development.

Any biologic products for which we receive FDA approvals are subject to pervasive continuing regulation by the FDA. Certain requirements include, among other things, record‑keeping requirements, reporting adverse experiences with the product, providing the FDA with updated safety and efficacy information annually or more frequently for specific events, product sampling and distribution requirements, complying with certain electronic records and signature requirements and complying with FDA promotion and advertising requirements. These promotion and advertising requirements include, among others, standards for direct‑to‑consumer advertising, prohibitions against promoting drugs for uses or in patient populations that are not described in the drug’s approved labeling, known as “off‑label use,” and other promotional activities, such as those considered to be false or misleading. Failure to comply with FDA requirements can have negative consequences, including the immediate discontinuation of noncomplying materials, adverse publicity, enforcement letters from the FDA, mandated corrective advertising or communications with doctors, and civil or criminal penalties. Such enforcement may also lead to scrutiny and enforcement by other government and regulatory bodies. Although physicians may prescribe legally available drugs for off‑label uses, manufacturers may not encourage, market or promote such off‑label uses. As a result, “off‑label promotion” has formed the basis for litigation under the Federal False Claims Act, violations of which are subject to significant civil fines and penalties.

The manufacturing of NexoBrid, EscharEx and our pipeline product candidates are and will be required to comply with applicable FDA manufacturing requirements contained in the FDA’s cGMP regulations. NexoBrid is manufactured at our production plant in Yavne, Israel, which is cGMP certified. The FDA’s cGMP regulations require, among other things, quality control and quality assurance, as well as the corresponding maintenance of comprehensive records and documentation. Biologic manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved drugs and biologics are also required to register their establishments and list any products they make with the FDA and to comply with related requirements in certain states. These entities are further subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with cGMP and other laws. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain cGMP compliance. In addition, a BLA holder must comply with post‑marketing requirements, such as reporting of certain adverse events. Such reports can present liability exposure, as well as increase regulatory scrutiny that could lead to additional inspections, labeling restrictions or other corrective action to minimize further patient risk. Discovery of problems with a product after approval may result in serious and extensive restrictions on the product, manufacturer or holder of an approved BLA, as well as lead to potential market disruptions. These restrictions may include recalls, fines, warning letters, or untitled letters, clinical holds on clinical studies, refusal of the FDA to approve pending applicants or supplements to approved applications, product seizure or detention, or refusal to permit the import or export of products, suspension or revocation of a product license approval until the FDA is assured that quality standards can be met, and continuing oversight of manufacturing by the FDA under a “consent decree,” which frequently includes the imposition of costs and continuing inspections over a period of many years, as well as possible withdrawal of the product from the market. In addition, changes to the manufacturing process generally require prior FDA approval before being implemented. Other types of changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications and additional labeling claims, are also subject to further FDA review and approval.

The FDA also may impose a number of post‑approval requirements as a condition of approval of a BLA. For example, the FDA may require post‑marketing testing, or Phase 4 testing, as well as REMS and/or surveillance to monitor the effects of an approved product or place other conditions on an approval that could otherwise restrict the distribution or use of NexoBrid.

On August 20, 2003, NexoBrid received orphan drug designation in the United States. Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a drug product as an “orphan drug” if it is intended to treat a rare disease or condition, meaning that it affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or more in cases in which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making a drug product available in the United States for treatment of the disease or condition will be recovered from sales of the product. A company must request orphan product designation before submitting a BLA. If the request is granted, the FDA will disclose the identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential use. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in or shorten the duration of the regulatory review and approval process.

If a product with orphan status receives the first FDA approval for the disease or condition for which it has such designation, the product will be entitled to orphan product exclusivity. Orphan product exclusivity means that FDA may not approve any other applications for the same product for the same disease or condition for seven years, except in certain limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan drug exclusivity. Competitors may receive approval of different products for the indication for which the orphan product has exclusivity and may obtain approval for the same product but for a different indication. If a drug or drug product designated as an orphan product ultimately receives marketing approval for an indication broader than that designated in its orphan product application, it may not be entitled to exclusivity. In addition, exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition.

Under the Pediatric Research Equity Act of 2003, a BLA or supplement thereto must contain data that are adequate to assess the safety and effectiveness of the drug product for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations, and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe and effective. Sponsors must also submit pediatric study plans prior to the assessment data. Those plans must contain an outline of the proposed pediatric study or studies the applicant plans to conduct, including study objectives and design, any deferral or waiver requests, and other information required by regulation. The applicant, the FDA, and the FDA’s internal review committee must then review the information submitted, consult with each other and agree upon a final plan. The FDA or the applicant may request an amendment to the plan at any time.

The FDA may, on its own initiative or at the request of the applicant, grant deferrals for submission of some or all pediatric data until after approval of the product for use in adults, or full or partial waivers from the pediatric data requirements. Additional requirements and procedures relating to deferral requests and requests for extension of deferrals are contained in the FDASIA. Unless otherwise required by regulation, the pediatric data requirements do not apply to products with orphan designation.

Separately, in the event the FDA issues a Written Request for pediatric data relating to a product, a BLA sponsor who submits such data may be entitled to pediatric exclusivity. Pediatric exclusivity is another type of non‑patent marketing exclusivity in the United States which, if granted, provides for the attachment of an additional six months of marketing protection to the term of any existing exclusivity, including other non‑patent and orphan exclusivity. This six‑month exclusivity may be granted if a BLA sponsor submits pediatric data that fairly respond to the Written Request from the FDA for such data. The data do not need to show that the product is effective in the pediatric population studied; rather, if the clinical trial is deemed to fairly respond to the FDA’s request, the additional protection is granted. If reports of requested pediatric studies are submitted to and accepted by the FDA within the statutory time limits, whatever statutory or regulatory periods of exclusivity or patent protection cover the product are extended by six months. This is not a patent term extension, but it effectively extends the regulatory period during which the FDA cannot accept or approve another application.

In the case of product candidates that are intended to treat certain rare life-threatening diseases, conducting controlled clinical trials to determine efficacy may be unethical or unfeasible. Under regulations issued by the FDA in 2002, often referred to as the “Animal Rule”, the approval of such products can be based on clinical data from trials in healthy human subjects that demonstrate adequate safety and efficacy data from adequate and well-controlled animal studies. Among other requirements, the animal studies must establish that the drug or biological product is reasonably likely to produce clinical benefits in humans. Because the FDA must agree that data derived from animal studies may be extrapolated to establish safety and effectiveness in humans, seeking approval under the Animal Rule may add significant time, complexity and uncertainty to the testing and approval process. In addition, products approved under the Animal Rule are subject to additional requirements including post-marketing study requirements, restrictions imposed on marketing or distribution or requirements to provide information to patients.

A patent claiming a new drug product may be eligible for a limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (the “Hatch‑Waxman Act”), which permits a patent restoration of up to five years for the patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review. The restoration period granted is typically one‑half the time between the effective date of an IND and the submission date of a BLA, plus the time between the submission date of a BLA and the ultimate approval date. Patent term restoration cannot be used to extend the remaining term of a patent past a total of fourteen years from the product’s approval date. Only one patent applicable to an approved drug product is eligible for the extension, and the application for the extension must be submitted prior to the expiration of the patent in question. A patent that covers multiple drugs for which approval is sought can only be extended in connection with one of the approvals. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office reviews and approves the application for any patent term extension or restoration in consultation with the FDA.

 The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act (collectively, the “ACA”), which was signed into law in 2010, includes a subtitle called the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (“BPCIA”), which created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are biosimilar to or interchangeable with an FDA-approved reference biological product.

Biosimilarity, which requires that there be no clinically meaningful differences between the biological product and the reference product in terms of safety, purity, and potency, can be shown through analytical studies, animal studies, and a clinical study or studies. Interchangeability requires that a product is biosimilar to the reference product and the product must demonstrate that it can be expected to produce the same clinical results as the reference product in any given patient and, for products that are administered multiple times to an individual, the biologic and the reference biologic may be alternated or switched after one has been previously administered without increasing safety risks or risks of diminished efficacy relative to exclusive use of the reference biologic. However, complexities associated with the larger, and often more complex, structures of biological products, as well as the processes by which such products are manufactured, pose significant hurdles to implementation of the abbreviated approval pathway that are still being worked out by the FDA.

Under the BPCIA, an application for a biosimilar product may not be submitted to the FDA until four years following the date that the reference product was first licensed by the FDA. In addition, the approval of a biosimilar product may not be made effective by the FDA until 12 years from the date on which the reference product was first licensed. During this 12‑year period of exclusivity, another company may still market a competing version of the reference product if the FDA approves a full BLA for the competing product containing the sponsor’s own preclinical data and data from adequate and well‑controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of their product.

The BPCIA also created certain exclusivity periods for biosimilars approved as interchangeable products. At this juncture, it is unclear whether products deemed “interchangeable” by the FDA will, in fact, be readily substituted by pharmacies, which are governed by state pharmacy law. The BPCIA is complex and continues to be interpreted and implemented by the FDA. In addition, recent government proposals have sought to 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 impact, implementation, and meaning of the BPCIA remains subject to significant uncertainty.

In addition to the above regulations, we must obtain approval of a product by the comparable regulatory authorities of foreign countries outside of the European Union and the United States before we can commence clinical trials or marketing of NexoBrid in those countries. The approval process varies from country to country and the time may be longer or shorter than that required for FDA or EMA approval. In addition, the requirements governing the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary greatly from country to country. In all cases, clinical trials are conducted in accordance with GCP and the applicable regulatory requirements and the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki.

Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of any products for which we obtain regulatory approval. In the United States, EU and other markets, sales of any products for which we receive regulatory approval for commercial sale will depend to a large extent on the availability of reimbursement from third‑party payors. Third‑party payors include governments, government health administrative authorities, managed care providers, private health insurers and other organizations. The process for determining whether a payor will provide coverage for a drug product may be separate from the process for setting the price or reimbursement rate that the payor will pay for the drug product. Third‑party payors may limit coverage to specific drug products on an approved list, or formulary, which might not include all of the drug products approved for a particular indication by the FDA, European Commission or National Ministries of Health. Third‑party payors are increasingly challenging the price and examining the medical necessity and cost‑effectiveness of medical products and services, in addition to their safety and efficacy. We may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies in order to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost‑effectiveness of NexoBrid, in addition to the costs required to obtain the FDA or other Ministry of Health approvals. Additionally, NexoBrid may not be considered medically necessary or cost‑effective. A payor’s decision to provide coverage for a drug product does not guarantee that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Adequate third‑party reimbursement may not be available to enable us to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development.

In the United States, the ACA substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers and significantly impacted the pharmaceutical industry. The ACA contains a number of provisions, including those governing enrollment in federal healthcare programs, reimbursement changes and fraud and abuse provisions, which will impact existing government healthcare programs and will result in the development of new programs, including Medicare payment for performance initiatives and improvements to the physician quality reporting system and feedback program.  Additionally, the ACA:

There has been heightened governmental scrutiny recently over the manner in which drug manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which have resulted in several Congressional inquiries and proposed bills designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. We expect that additional U.S. federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that the U.S. federal government will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for our products or additional pricing pressures. At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.

In the EU, pricing and reimbursement schemes vary widely from country to country and often within regions or provinces of countries. Some countries may limit the annual budget of coverage or request that the company participate in the cost above certain use levels or for treatments perceived as unsuccessful and impose monitoring processes on the use of the product. Some countries and hospitals may require inclusion into the hospital formulary for payment from the hospital budget. Some countries and hospitals may require the completion of additional studies that compare the cost‑effectiveness of a particular drug candidate to currently available therapies. For example, the EU provides options for its member states to restrict the range of drug products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. European Union member states may approve a specific price for a drug product or may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the drug product on the market. Other member states allow companies to fix their own prices for drug products, but monitor and control company profits. The downward pressure on health care costs in general, particularly prescription drugs, has become intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products. In addition, in some countries, cross‑border imports from low‑priced markets exert competitive pressure that may reduce pricing within a country. Any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for drug products may not allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements.

Healthcare providers, physicians and third‑party payors play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of drug products that are granted marketing approval. Arrangements with healthcare providers, third‑party payors and other customers are subject to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations. Such restrictions under applicable federal, state and foreign healthcare laws and regulations, include the following:

Violations of any of these laws or any other governmental laws and regulations that may apply include, without limitation, significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, imprisonment, exclusion of products from government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, disgorgement, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations.

Some state laws require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government in addition to requiring drug manufacturers to report information related to payments to physicians and other health care providers or marketing expenditures. Additionally, certain state and local laws require the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives. State and foreign laws also govern the privacy and security of health information in some circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act, or CCPA, which went into effect on January 1, 2020, among other things, creates new data privacy obligations for covered companies and provides new privacy rights to California residents, including the right to opt out of certain disclosures of their information. The CCPA also creates a private right of action with statutory damages for certain data breaches, thereby potentially increasing risks associated with a data breach. Although the law includes limited exceptions, including for “protected health information” maintained by a covered entity or business associate, it may regulate or impact our processing of personal information depending on the context. Further, the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA), recently passed in California. The CPRA will impose additional data protection obligations on covered businesses, including additional consumer rights processes, limitations on data uses, new audit requirements for higher risk data, and opt outs for certain uses of sensitive data. It will also create a new California data protection agency authorized to issue substantive regulations and could result in increased privacy and information security enforcement. The majority of the provisions will go into effect on January 1, 2023, and additional compliance investment and potential business process changes may be required.

We are subject to extensive environmental, health and safety laws and regulations in a number of jurisdictions, primarily Israel, governing, among other things: the use, storage, registration, handling, emission and disposal of chemicals, waste materials and sewage; chemicals, air, water and ground contamination; air emissions and the cleanup of contaminated sites, including any contamination that results from spills due to our failure to properly dispose of chemicals, waste materials and sewage. Our operations at our Yavne manufacturing facility use chemicals and produce waste materials and sewage. Our activities require permits from various governmental authorities including, local municipal authorities, the Ministry of Environmental Protection and the Ministry of Health. The Ministry of Environmental Protection and the Ministry of Health, local authorities and the municipal water and sewage company conduct periodic inspections in order to review and ensure our compliance with the various regulations.

These laws, regulations and permits could potentially require the expenditure by us of significant amounts for compliance or remediation. If we fail to comply with such laws, regulations or permits, we may be subject to fines and other civil, administrative or criminal sanctions, including the revocation of permits and licenses necessary to continue our business activities. In addition, we may be required to pay damages or civil judgments in respect of third‑party claims, including those relating to personal injury (including exposure to hazardous substances we use, store, handle, transport, manufacture or dispose of), property damage or contribution claims. Some environmental, health and safety laws allow for strict, joint and several liability for remediation costs, regardless of comparative fault. We may be identified as a responsible party under such laws. Such developments could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, laws and regulations relating to environmental, health and safety matters are often subject to change. In the event of any changes or new laws or regulations, we could be subject to new compliance measures or to penalties for activities which were previously permitted. For instance, new Israeli regulations were promulgated in 2012 relating to the discharge of industrial sewage into the sewer system. These regulations establish new and potentially significant fines for discharging forbidden or irregular sewage into the sewage system.

Our principal executive offices are located at 42 Hayarkon Street, Yavne 8122745, Israel. We lease these facilities from our largest shareholder, Clal Life Sciences, L.P. (“CLS”), pursuant to a sub‑lease agreement, as amended, that expires on October 30, 2025. The facilities consist of approximately 32,300 square feet of space, and the yearly lease fee is approximately $469,000. These facilities house our administrative headquarters, our research and development laboratories and our manufacturing plant. The sub-lease agreement includes an option to extend the lease period for additional 3 years at our sole discretion.

The legal name of our company is MediWound Ltd. and we are organized under the laws of the State of Israel. Our corporate structure consists of MediWound Ltd., our Israeli parent company, (i) MediWound Germany GmbH, our active wholly‑owned subsidiary, which was incorporated on April 16, 2013 under the laws of the Federal Republic of Germany (ii) MediWound US, Inc., which was incorporated on December 8, 2020 under the laws of the State of Delaware and (iii) MediWound UK Limited, our inactive wholly‑owned subsidiary, which was incorporated on July 26, 2004 under the laws of England.

See “ITEM 4.B. Business Overview—Properties”, “ITEM 4.B. Business Overview—Manufacturing, Supply and Production” and “ITEM 4.B. Business Overview—Environmental, Health and Safety Matters”.

None.

 We are a biopharmaceutical company that develops, manufactures and commercializes novel, cost effective, bio-therapeutic solutions for tissue repair and regeneration. Our strategy is centered around our validated enzymatic platform technology, focused on next-generation protein-based therapies for burn and wound care, and for tissue repair.

Our first innovative biopharmaceutical product, NexoBrid, received marketing authorization from the European Commission and the Israeli, Argentinean, South Korean, Russian, Ukrainian, Eurasian economic union (Armenia, Kyrgyzstan, Belarus, Kazakhstan), Peruvian, Chilean, Taiwanese and United Arab Emirates Ministries of Health for removal of dead or damaged tissue, known as eschar, in adults with deep partial‑ and full‑thickness thermal burns, also referred to as severe burns. In September 2020, the FDA accepted for review our BLA, which was based on acute data, including primary, secondary and safety endpoints, as well as 12-month safety follow-up data derived from our Phase 3 pivotal study. In June 2021, we received a Complete Response letter from the FDA stating that our BLA was not approved. We had a Type A meeting with the FDA in October 2021 to discuss a path forward for resubmission, in which we gained clarity on a path forward for resubmission of the BLA, and we plan to resubmit our BLA for NexoBrid in mid-2022. NexoBrid, a concentrated mixture of proteolytic enzymes enriched in bromelain, represents a new paradigm in burn care management and our clinical trials have demonstrated, with statistical significance, its ability to non‑surgically and rapidly remove the eschar earlier relative to existing standard of care upon patient admission, without harming viable tissues.

We commercialize NexoBrid globally via multiple sales channels. We sell NexoBrid to burn centers in Europe and Israel, primarily through our sales force, focusing on leading burn centers and key opinion leader management, and are establishing additional distribution channels in the European Union to extend the product's outreach. We have signed distribution agreements with local distributors in multiple international markets, which are responsible for obtaining local marketing authorization within the relevant territory. In the United States, we entered into exclusive license and supply agreements with Vericel to commercialize NexoBrid in North America upon FDA’s approval. For additional information on the commercialization of NexoBrid See ITEM 4.B.  “Information on the Company - Marketing, Sales and Distribution.”

We are conducting an expanded access treatment protocol (NEXT) for NexoBrid to treat burn patients with deep partial- and full-thickness burns in the U.S., which is funded by BARDA and which will continue to take place during the review of our upcoming BLA by the FDA. We are also conducting a pediatric study to broaden the approved indication of NexoBrid, which is also being funded by BARDA, in which we reported positive topline results in July 2021.

An additional product candidate is EscharEx, a topical bioactive drug candidate designed to enzymatically debride chronic and other hard-to-heal wounds.

In January 2022 we announced positive topline results from our ongoing Phase 2 study for the treatment of VLUs. These topline results suggest that the study met its primary endpoint, demonstrating that patients treated with EscharEx had a statistically significant higher incidence of complete debridement compared to the gel vehicle, with a p-value of 0.004.

Our third innovative product candidate, MW005, is a topically applied biological drug candidate for the treatment of non-melanoma skin cancers, based on the same active substance of NexoBrid and EscharEx products, a concentrated mixture of proteolytic enzymes enriched in bromelain.

We manufacture NexoBrid and our product candidates in our state‑of‑the‑art, EMA‑certified, cGMP‑compliant, sterile pharmaceutical products manufacturing facility at our headquarters in Yavne, Israel. Our securities are listed for trading on Nasdaq since March 2014 following our Initial Public Offering.

As of December 31, 2021, we had cash and cash equivalents of $11.0 million. Our revenues were $21.8 million and $23.8 million in 2020 and 2021, respectively. Our net operating loss was $8.8 million and $11.2 million in 2020 and 2021, respectively. We had an accumulated deficit of $148.5 million as of December 31, 2021. We expect to incur significant expenses and operating losses for the foreseeable future, as research and development activities are central to our operations, which will offset by cash inflows from NexoBrid.

We expect to continue to invest in our research and development efforts, including in respect of our NexoBrid ongoing clinical trials which are fully funded by BARDA, as well as the clinical development and trials of EscharEx, MW005 and our other pipeline product candidates. In addition, we expect to continue to advance NexoBrid as a standard of care, and expand its commercial reach in international markets, including for potential use as a medical countermeasure during mass casualty events.

Sources of revenues. We derive revenues from sales of NexoBrid to burn centers and hospitals burn units in Europe and Israel as well as to local distributors in other countries in accordance with distribution agreements we have in place, which also include revenues from licenses. We generate revenues from BARDA procurement of NexoBrid for emergency stockpile pursuant to BARDA contract.

We generate revenues from development services provided to BARDA. Our ability to generate additional, more significant revenues will depend on the successful commercialization of NexoBrid, which itself will be dependent in part upon receipt of approval from the FDA.

Our total cost of revenues includes expenses for the manufacturing of NexoBrid, including: the cost of raw materials; employee‑related expenses, including salaries, equity based‑compensation and other benefits and related expenses, lease payments, utility payments, depreciation, changes in inventory of finished products, royalties and other manufacturing expenses. These expenses are partially reduced by an allotment of manufacturing costs associated with research and development activities to research and development expenses.

Cost of revenues also includes costs associated with the research and development services provided to BARDA, including salaries and related expenses, clinical trials, sub‑contractors and external advisors. We expect that our cost of revenues from sale of products will continue to increase as we expand the sale of NexoBrid throughout the European Union, the United States and other international markets.

Research and development activities are central to our business model. Product candidates in later stages of clinical development generally have higher development costs than those in earlier stages of clinical development, primarily due to the increased size and duration of later‑stage clinical trials. We expect research and development costs to increase significantly for the foreseeable future as EscharEx progresses in its clinical program in the U.S. and our other pipeline product candidates' progress in clinical trials. However, we do not believe that it is possible at this time to accurately project total program‑specific expenses to reach commercialization. There are numerous factors associated with the successful development of any of our product candidates, including future trial design and various regulatory requirements, many of which cannot be determined with accuracy at this time based on our stage of development. Additionally, future commercial and regulatory factors beyond our control will affect our clinical development programs and plans. Our actual spending could differ as our plans change and we invest in other drugs or potentially reduce our anticipated funding on research for existing products.

Research and development expenses consist primarily of compensation for employees engaged in research and development activities, including salaries, equity‑based compensation, benefits and related expenses, clinical trials, contract research organization sub‑contractors, development materials, external advisors and the allotted cost of our manufacturing facility for research and development purposes.

Selling and marketing expenses consist primarily of compensation expenses for personnel engaged in sales and marketing, including salaries, equity based‑compensation and benefits and related expenses, as well as promotion, marketing, market access, medical, and sales and distribution activities. These expenses also include costs related to our subsidiary in Germany, which is focused primarily on marketing NexoBrid, and cost related to maintain marketing authorization.

General and administrative expenses consist principally of compensation for employees in executive and administrative functions, including salaries, equity‑based compensation, benefits and other related expenses, professional consulting services, including legal and audit fees, as well as costs of office and overhead. We expect general and administrative expenses to remain stable.

Financial income includes interest income, revaluation of financial instruments and exchange rate differences. Financial expense consists primarily of revaluation of financial instruments, financial expenses in respect of deferred revenue, revaluation of lease liabilities and exchange rate differences. The market interest due on government grants received from the IIA is also considered a financial expense, and is recognized beginning on the date we receive the grant until the date on which the grant is expected to be repaid as part of the revaluation to fair value of liabilities in respect of government grants.

Following the expiration of our PolyHeal license in 2013, we accounted for our operation related to PolyHeal as a discontinued operation in accordance with IFRS accounting standard 5, “Non‑current Assets Held for Sale and Discontinued Operations.” Accordingly, the results of any legal process profit or loss are reported separately as a discontinued operation in our statement of operations for the periods presented below.

The standard corporate tax rate in Israel is 23%.

We do not generate taxable income in Israel, as we have historically incurred operating losses resulting in carry forward tax losses totaling approximately $148 million as of December 31, 2021. We anticipate that we will be able to carry forward these tax losses indefinitely to future tax years. Accordingly, we do not expect to pay taxes in Israel until we have taxable income after the full utilization of our carry forward tax losses.

Under the Law for the Encouragement of Capital Investments, 5719‑1959 (the “Investment Law”), we have been granted “Beneficiary Enterprise” status, which provides certain benefits, including tax exemptions and reduced corporate tax rates. Income not eligible for Beneficiary Enterprise benefits is taxed at the regular corporate tax rate. The benefit entitlement period starts from the first year that the Beneficiary Enterprise first earns taxable income, and is limited to 12 years from the year in which the company requested to have tax benefits apply.

We generated total revenues of approximately $23.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2021 compared to approximately $21.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2020. The increase in total revenues was a result of an increase in sale of products of $2.1 mainly derived from BARDA emergency stockpile procurement of $1.6 million and an increase in license sales of $1.4 million, partially offset by a decrease in development services to BARDA of $1.6 million.

Revenues from sales of products in 2021 increased $2.2 million, or 29%, in comparison to 2020, primarily as a result of BARDA’s procurement of NexoBrid for emergency stockpile of approximately $5.5 million net in 2021, versus approximately $3.8 million net during 2020. Revenues from BARDA’s procurement were recognized net of Vericel’s share pursuant to gross profit split.

Revenues from development services decreased 11% from $13.9 million in 2020 to $12.4 million in 2021, as a result of completion of NexoBrid clinical studies.

In 2021, we recognized $1.8 million, of license revenues, driven by new distribution agreements and achieving certain milestones with current distributors agreements, compared to $0.4 million in 2020.

Our revenues, as reported in our consolidated financial statements, are based on the location of the customers, as shown in the below table:

BARDA contributed 83% and 76% of our total revenues in 2020 and 2021, respectively.

Cost of revenues as a percentage of total revenues decreased from 65% for 2020 to 63% for 2021.

Cost of revenues from sales of products as a percentage of revenues from sales of products increased to approximately 52% for the year ended December 31, 2021 from approximately 42% in the year ended December 31, 2020. The increase of cost of revenues from sales of product is primarily driven by BARDA procurement for emergency response preparedness.

Cost of revenues from development services as a percentage of revenues from development services was approximately 80% in the year ended December 31, 2021 compared to approximately 79% in the year ended December 31, 2020.

Cost of revenues from license agreements as a percentage of revenues from license agreements were 6% in the year ended December 31, 2021, due to costs associated with the support of our distributors to achieve their marketing authorizations.

Research and development expenses, increased by 34% from approximately $7.7 million in the year ended December 31, 2020 to approximately $10.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2021. The increase was primarily related to EscharEx clinical development program.

Selling and marketing expenses increased by 6% in 2021 compared to 2020, from approximately $3.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2020 to approximately $3.4 million in the year ended December 31, 2021.

General and administrative expenses increased 15% in 2021 compared to 2020 from approximately $5.5 million in the year ended December 31, 2020 to approximately $6.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2021. The increase in general and administrative expenses was primarily due to rent and maintenance allocation and legal consultation.

Financial income decreased from $0.8 million in the year ended December 31, 2020 to $0 million in the year ended December 31, 2021. The decrease was primarily driven by the Teva contingent liability revaluation and interest on deposits.

Financial expense increased from approximately $1.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2020 to approximately $2.3 million in the year ended December 31, 2021. The increase in financial expenses in 2021 was primarily driven by the Teva contingent liability revaluation, described below under “Application of Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates - Contingent Consideration for Purchase of Shares”, the Israeli innovation authority grant interest, currency exchange fluctuations and lease revaluations.

Profit from discontinued operations was $0 million for the year ended December 31, 2021 compared with $0.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2020. The profit from discontinued operations in 2020 was as a result of the Polyheal settlement of the litigation with certain PolyHeal Ltd.'s ("PolyHeal") shareholders. See “ITEM 8.A. Consolidated Statements and Other Financial Information—Legal Proceedings”.

Our primary uses of cash are to fund working capital requirements, manufacturing costs, research and development expenses of EscharEx and other products candidates, as well as sales and marketing activities associated with the commercialization of NexoBrid in Europe.

We completed an underwritten follow-on offering in September 2017, whereby we issued and sold 5,037,664 ordinary shares and received net proceeds of approximately $22.7 million (after deducting the underwriting discount and offering expenses payable by us), pursuant to our previous shelf registration statement on Form F‑3. We will continue to use the net proceeds from the sale of securities offered by us pursuant to that follow-on offering to fund our research and development activities, primarily the clinical development of EscharEx, and the remainder, if any, for working capital and other general corporate purposes. The timing and amount of our actual expenditures will be based on many factors, including cash flows from operations and the anticipated growth of our business. Under our current shelf registration statement on Form F-3 declared effective by the SEC on April 22, 2019, we may offer from time to time up to $125 million in the aggregate of our ordinary shares, warrants and/or debt securities in one or more series or issuances.  In February 2020, we entered into an Open Market Sales Agreement with Jefferies LLC to issue and sell our ordinary shares with gross sales proceeds of up to $15 million, from time to time, through an at the market offering under which Jefferies LLC will act as our sales agent. As of the date hereof, we have not issued or sold any ordinary shares pursuant to the Open Market Sales Agreement.

Funding under the BARDA contracts is classified under cash use for continuing operating activities.

Our capital expenditures for fiscal years 2020 and 2021 amounted to $0.9 million and $0.5 million, respectively. Capital expenditures consist primarily of investments in manufacturing equipment and leasehold improvements.

In March 2022, we entered into an underwriting agreement with Oppenheimer & Co., Inc., a representative of the several underwriters (the “Underwriters”), relating to the issuance and sale of an aggregate of 5,208,333 of our ordinary shares at a price per share equal to $1.92.  Total gross proceeds of the offering was approximately $10.0 million. The offering closed on March 7, 2022 and we received approximately $8.7 million in net proceeds, after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses.  Certain entities affiliated with CBI purchased approximately $2.8 million of ordinary shares in the offering at the public offering price. The Underwriters received the same underwriting discount on the shares purchased by these entities as they will on any other shares sold to the public in this offering. The securities purchased by these entities are subject to lock-up agreements with the Underwriters. We also granted the underwriters a 30-day option to purchase up to an additional 781,249 ordinary shares at the public offering price, less underwriting discounts and commissions.

Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including our revenue growth, timing of milestone payments, the timing and extent of our spending on research and development efforts, and international expansion. We may also seek to invest in or acquire complementary businesses or technologies. To the extent that existing cash and cash from operations are insufficient to fund our future activities, we may need to raise additional funding through debt and equity financing. Additional funds may not be available on favorable terms or at all. We believe our existing cash, cash equivalents and short‑term bank deposits will be sufficient to satisfy our liquidity requirements for at least the next 24 months.

The following table summarizes our consolidated statement of cash flows for the periods presented. The below discussion beneath the table omits a description of our cash flows for the year ended December 31, 2019. In order to view that discussion, please see “Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects—B. Liquidity and Capital Resources—Cash Flows” in our Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2020, which we filed with the SEC on February 25, 2021:

Net cash used in all periods resulted primarily from our net loss adjusted for non‑cash charges and measurements and changes in components of working capital. Adjustments for non‑cash items include depreciation and amortization, equity‑based compensation, revaluation of contingent liabilities and lease liability, and changes in assets and liabilities items.

Net cash used in discontinued operating activities was $0 million in the year ended December 31, 2021, compared to approximately $0.2 million in the year ended December 31, 2020. The cash used in 2020 was primarily attributable to the consideration paid to PolyHeal’s shareholders following the settlement of the litigation with certain PolyHeal's shareholders. See “ITEM 8.A. Consolidated Statements and Other Financial Information—Legal Proceedings”.

Net cash provided by continuing investing activities primarily resulted from proceeds of investments in short‑term banks deposits offset by purchases of property and equipment. Net cash provided by investing activities was $3.5 million in the year ended December 31, 2021, compared to $17.4 million provided during the year ended December 31, 2020.

Net cash provided by continuing financing activities primarily resulted from payments of lease liabilities and repayment to IIA. Net cash used in continuing financing activities was $1.1 million during the year ended December 31, 2021 compared to $0.6 million during the year ended December 31, 2020.

The following is a brief summary of the material Israeli tax laws applicable to us, and certain Israeli Government programs that benefit us and therefore impact our results of operations and financial condition. To the extent that the discussion is based on new tax legislation that has not yet been subject to judicial or administrative interpretation, we cannot assure you that the appropriate tax authorities or the courts will accept the views expressed in this discussion. The discussion below is subject to change, including due to amendments under Israeli law or changes to the applicable judicial or administrative interpretations of Israeli law, which change could affect the tax consequences described below.

Generally, Israeli companies are subject to a corporate tax on their taxable income. Effective January 1, 2018 and thereafter, the corporate tax rate is 23%. However, the effective tax rate payable by a company that derives income from an Approved Enterprise, a Beneficiary Enterprise, a Preferred Enterprise or Technology Enterprise (as discussed below) may be considerably less. Capital gains derived by an Israeli company are generally subject to the prevailing regular corporate tax rate.

The Law for the Encouragement of Industry (Taxes), 5729-1969 (the “Industry Encouragement Law”), provides several tax benefits for “Industrial Companies.”

The Industry Encouragement Law defines an “Industrial Company” as an Israeli resident-company which was incorporated in Israel, of which 90% or more of its income in any tax year, other than income from certain government loans, is derived from an “Industrial Enterprise” owned by it and located in Israel. An “Industrial Enterprise” is defined as an enterprise whose principal activity in a given tax year is industrial production.

The following tax benefits, among others, are available to Industrial Companies:

Eligibility for benefits under the Industry Encouragement Law is not contingent upon approval of any governmental authority.

We believe that we currently qualify as an Industrial Company within the meaning of the Industry Encouragement Law. However, there can be no assurance that we will continue to qualify as an Industrial Company or that the benefits described above will be available in the future.

The Investment Law provides certain incentives for capital investments in production facilities (or other eligible assets).

The Investment Law was significantly amended several times during recent years, with the three most significant changes effective as of April 1, 2005 (the “2005 Amendment”), as of January 1, 2011 (the “2011 Amendment”), and as of January 1, 2017 (the “2017 Amendment”). Pursuant to the 2005 Amendment, tax benefits granted in accordance with the provisions of the Investment Law prior to its revision by the 2005 Amendment remain in force but any benefits granted subsequently are subject to the provisions of the amended Investment Law. Similarly, the 2011 Amendment introduced new benefits to replace those granted in accordance with the provisions of the Investment Law in effect prior to the 2011 Amendment. However, companies entitled to benefits under the Investment Law as in effect prior to January 1, 2011 were entitled to choose to continue to enjoy such benefits, provided that certain conditions are met, or elect instead, irrevocably, to forego such benefits and have the benefits of the 2011 Amendment apply. The 2017 Amendment introduces new benefits for Technological Enterprises, alongside the existing tax benefits. Prior to 2011, we did not utilize any of the benefits for which we were eligible under the Investment Law.

The following is a summary of the Investment Law subsequent to its amendments as well as the relevant changes contained in the new legislation.

The 2005 Amendment applies to new investment programs and investment programs commencing after 2004, but does not apply to investment programs approved prior to April 1, 2005 (“Approved Enterprise”). The 2005 Amendment provides that terms and benefits included in any certificate of approval that was granted before the 2005 Amendment became effective (April 1, 2005) will remain subject to the provisions of the Investment Law as in effect on the date of such approval. Pursuant to the 2005 Amendment, the Israeli Authority for Investments and Development of the Israeli Ministry of Economy (the “Investment Center”) will continue to grant Approved Enterprise status to qualifying investments. The 2005 Amendment, however, limits the scope of enterprises that may be approved by the Investment Center by setting criteria for the approval of a facility as an Approved Enterprise.

The 2005 Amendment provides that Approved Enterprise status will only be necessary for receiving cash grants. As a result, it is no longer necessary for a company to obtain the advance approval of the Investment Center in order to receive the tax benefits previously available under the alternative benefits track. Rather, a company may claim the tax benefits offered by the Investment Law directly in its tax returns, provided that its facilities meet the criteria for tax benefits set forth in the 2005 Amendment. Companies or programs under the new provisions receiving these tax benefits are referred to as Beneficiary Enterprises. Companies that have a Beneficiary Enterprise, are entitled to approach the Israel Tax Authority for a pre‑ruling regarding their eligibility for tax benefits under the Investment Law, as amended.

Tax benefits are available under the 2005 Amendment to production facilities (or other eligible facilities), which are generally required to derive more than 25% of their business income from export to specific markets with a population of at least 14 million in 2012 (such export criteria will further increase in the future by 1.4% per annum). In order to receive the tax benefits, the 2005 Amendment states that a company must make an investment which meets certain conditions, including exceeding a minimum investment amount specified in the Investment Law. Such investment allows a company to receive “Beneficiary Enterprise” status, and may be made over a period of no more than three years from the end of the year in which the company chose to have the tax benefits apply to its Beneficiary Enterprise. Where the company requests to apply the tax benefits to an expansion of existing facilities, only the expansion will be considered to be a Beneficiary Enterprise and the company’s effective tax rate will be the weighted average of the applicable rates. In this case, the minimum investment required in order to qualify as a Beneficiary Enterprise is required to exceed a certain percentage of the value of the company’s production assets before the expansion.

The extent of the tax benefits available under the 2005 Amendment to qualifying income of a Beneficiary Enterprise depends on, among other things, the geographic location in Israel of the Beneficiary Enterprise. The location will also determine the period for which tax benefits are available. Such tax benefits include an exemption from corporate tax on undistributed income for a period of between two to ten years, depending on the geographic location of the Beneficiary Enterprise in Israel, and a reduced corporate tax rate of between 10% to 25% for the remainder of the benefits period, depending on the level of foreign investment in the company in each year. A company qualifying for tax benefits under the 2005 Amendment which pays a dividend out of income attributed to its Beneficiary Enterprise during the tax exemption period will be subject to corporate tax in respect of the amount of the dividend distributed (grossed‑up to reflect the pre‑tax income that it would have had to earn in order to distribute the dividend) at the corporate tax rate that would have otherwise been applicable. Dividends paid out of income attributed to a Beneficiary Enterprise (or out of dividends received from a company whose income is attributed to a Beneficiary Enterprise) are generally subject to withholding tax at source at the rate of 15% or such lower rate as may be provided in an applicable tax treaty, applicable to dividends and distributions out of income attributed to a Beneficiary Enterprise. The reduced rate of 15% is limited to dividends and distributions out of income attributed to a Beneficiary Enterprise during the benefits period and actually paid at any time up to 12 years thereafter, except with respect to a qualified Foreign Investment Company (as such term is defined in the Investment Law), in which case the 12‑year limit does not apply.

The benefits available to a Beneficiary Enterprise are subject to the fulfillment of conditions stipulated in the Investment Law and its regulations. If a company does not meet these conditions, it would be required to refund the amount of tax benefits, as adjusted by the Israeli consumer price index, and interest, or other monetary penalties.

We currently have Beneficiary Enterprise programs under the Investment Law, which we believe will entitle us to certain tax benefits. The majority of any taxable income from our Beneficiary Enterprise programs (once generated) would be tax exempt for a period of ten years commencing in the year in which we will first earn taxable income relating to such enterprises, subject to the 12-year limitation from the year the company chose to have its tax benefits apply.

The 2011 Amendment canceled the availability of the tax benefits granted under the Investment Law prior to 2011 and, instead, introduced new tax benefits for income generated by a “Preferred Company” through its “Preferred Enterprise” (as such terms are defined in the Investment Law) as of January 1, 2011. The definition of a Preferred Company includes a company incorporated in Israel that is not fully owned by a governmental entity, and that has, among other things, Preferred Enterprise status and is controlled and managed from Israel.

The tax benefits under the 2011 Amendment for a Preferred Company meeting the criteria of the law include, among others, a reduced corporate tax rate of 15% for preferred income attributed to a Preferred Enterprise in 2011 and 2012, unless the Preferred Enterprise was located in a specified development zone, in which case the rate was 10%. Under the 2011 Amendment, such corporate tax rate was reduced in 2013 from 15% and 10%, respectively, to 12.5% and 7%, respectively, and then increased to 16% and 9%, respectively, in 2014 and thereafter until 2016. Pursuant to the 2017 Amendment, in 2017 and thereafter, the corporate tax rate for Preferred Enterprise which is located in a specified development zone was decreased to 7.5%, while the reduced corporate tax rate for other development zones remains 16%. Income attributed to a Preferred Company from a “Special Preferred Enterprise” (as such term is defined in the Investment Law) would be entitled, during a benefits period of 10 years, to reduced tax rates of 8%, or 5% if the Special Preferred Enterprise is located in a certain development zone. As of January 1, 2017, the definition of “Special Preferred Enterprise” includes less stringent conditions. Dividends paid out of preferred income attributed to a Preferred Enterprise or to a Special Preferred Enterprise are generally subject to withholding tax at source at the rate of 20% or such lower rate as may be provided in an applicable tax treaty (subject to the receipt in advance of a valid certificate from the Israel Tax Authority allowing for a reduced tax rate). However, if such dividends are paid to an Israeli company, no tax is required to be withheld (although, if such dividends are subsequently distributed to individuals or a non‑Israeli company, withholding tax at a rate of 20% or such lower rate as may be provided in an applicable tax treaty will apply).

The 2011 Amendment also provided transitional provisions to address companies already enjoying existing tax benefits under the Investment Law. These transitional provisions provide, among other things, that: unless an irrevocable request is made to apply the provisions of the Investment Law as amended in 2011 with respect to income to be derived as of January 1, 2011, a Beneficiary Enterprise can elect to continue to benefit from the benefits provided to it before the 2011 Amendment came into effect, provided that certain conditions are met.

We have examined the possible effect, if any, of these provisions of the 2011 Amendment on our financial statements and have decided, at this time, not to opt to apply the new benefits under the 2011 Amendment. There can be no assurance that we will comply with the conditions required to remain eligible for benefits under the Investment Law in the future or that we will be entitled to any additional benefits thereunder.

The 2017 Amendment was enacted as part of the Economic Efficiency Law that was published on December 29, 2016, and is effective as of January 1, 2017. The 2017 Amendment provides new tax benefits for two types of “Technology Enterprises,” as described below, and is in addition to the other existing tax beneficial programs under the Investment Law.

The 2017 Amendment provides that a technology company satisfying certain conditions will qualify as a “Preferred Technology Enterprise” and will thereby enjoy a reduced corporate tax rate of 12% on income that qualifies as “Preferred Technology Income,” as defined in the Investment Law. The tax rate is further reduced to 7.5% for a Preferred Technology Enterprise located in development zone A. In addition, a Preferred Technology Company will enjoy a reduced corporate tax rate of 12% on capital gain derived from the sale of certain “Benefitted Intangible Assets” (as defined in the Investment Law) to a related foreign company if the Benefitted Intangible Assets were acquired from a foreign company on or after January 1, 2017 for at least NIS 200 million, and the sale receives prior approval from the Israeli Innovation Authority.

The 2017 Amendment further provides that a technology company satisfying certain conditions will qualify as a “Special Preferred Technology Enterprise” and will thereby enjoy a reduced corporate tax rate of 6% on “Preferred Technology Income” regardless of the company’s geographic location within Israel. In addition, a Special Preferred Technology Enterprise will enjoy a reduced corporate tax rate of 6% on capital gain derived from the sale of certain “Benefitted Intangible Assets” to a related foreign company if the Benefitted Intangible Assets were either developed by Special Preferred Technology Enterprise or acquired from a foreign company on or after January 1, 2017, and the sale received prior approval from IIA. A Special Preferred Technology Enterprise that acquires Benefitted Intangible Assets from a foreign company for more than NIS 500 million will be eligible for these benefits for at least ten years, subject to certain approvals as specified in the Investment Law.

Dividends distributed by a Preferred Technology Enterprise or a Special Preferred Technology Enterprise, paid out of Preferred Technology Income, are generally subject to withholding tax at source at the rate of 20% or such lower rate as may be provided in an applicable tax treaty (subject to the recipient in advance of a valid certificate from the Israeli Tax Authority allowing for reduced tax rate). However, if such dividends are paid to an Israeli company, no tax is required to be withheld. If such dividends are distributed to a foreign company and other conditions are met, the withholding tax rate will be 4% (or a lower under the tax treaty, if applicable, subject to the receipt in advance of a valid certificate from the Israeli Tax Authority allowing for a reduced tax rate).

Our research and development strategy is centered on developing our patented proteolytic enzyme technology, which underlies NexoBrid and EscharEx, into additional products for high‑value indications. Our research and development team is located at our facilities in Yavne, Israel, and consists of 25 employees as of December 31, 2021 and is supported by highly experienced consultants in various research and development disciplines.

We have received government grants (subject to our obligation to pay royalties) as part of the NexoBrid and EscharEx research and development programs approved by the IIA. The total gross amount of grants actually received by us from the IIA, including accrued LIBOR interest and net of royalties actually paid, totaled approximately $13.8 million as of December 31, 2021 and the amortized cost (using the interest method) of the liability totaled approximately $7.3 million and $8.1 million as of December 31, 2020 and 2021, respectively. Because the repayment of IIA grants is in the form of future royalties, the balance of the commitments to the IIA is presented as an amortized liability on our balance sheet. As of December 31, 2021, we had accrued and paid royalties to the IIA totaling $1.3 million.

We received funds from BARDA in accordance with the terms of our BARDA contracts. As of December 31, 2021 we had accrued $70 million of BARDA’s participation in NexoBrid’s research and development programs.

For a description of our research and development policies for the last three years, see “ITEM 4.B. Business Overview—Research and Development.”

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted companies in Israel and around the world, and as its trajectory remains highly uncertain, we cannot predict the duration and severity of the outbreak, its containment measures or the nature, timing and strength of recovery from it. Further, we cannot predict impacts, trends and uncertainties involving the pandemic’s effects on economic activity, the size of our labor force, our third-party partners, our investments in marketable securities, and the extent to which our revenue, income, profitability, liquidity, or capital resources may be materially and adversely affected prospectively. See also “ITEM 3.D. – Risk Factors – “The coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak could adversely impact our business, financial condition and results of operations.” and – “We depend on a sole supplier to obtain our intermediate drug substance, bromelain SP, which is necessary for the production of our products.” 

Other than the foregoing and as disclosed elsewhere in this annual report, we are not aware of any trends, uncertainties, demands, commitments or events for the period from January 1, 2021 to the present time that are reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on our net revenue, income, profitability, liquidity or capital resources, or that would cause the disclosed financial information to be not necessarily indicative of future operating results or financial condition.

Our consolidated financial statements are prepared in conformity with IFRS, as issued by the IASB.  The preparation of these historical financial statements in conformity with IFRS requires management to make estimates, assumptions and judgments in certain circumstances that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities and contingencies as of the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting periods. We evaluate our assumptions and estimates on an ongoing basis. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions. Our critical accounting estimates are described in Notes 2 and 3 to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report.

The following table sets forth the name, age and position of each of our executive officers and directors as of March 15, 2022:

Sharon Malka has served as our Chief Executive Officer since May 2019. Prior to that time, he served as our Chief Financial and Operations Officer, beginning in April 2007. From 2002 to 2007, Mr. Malka was a partner at Variance Economic Consulting Ltd., a multi‑disciplinary consulting boutique that specializes in financial and business services. Mr. Malka also served as a Senior Manager at Kesselman Corporate Finance, a division of PricewaterhouseCoopers Global Network, from 1998 to 2002. Mr. Malka holds a B.Sc. in Business Administration from the Business Management College in Israel and an M.B.A. from Bar Ilan University, Israel.

Boaz Gur-Lavie has served as our Chief Financial Officer since June 2019. Prior to joining MediWound, Mr. Gur-Lavie co-founded in 2015 the Center for Digital Innovation (CDI), a non-profit organization determined to improve the quality of lives by creating innovative new solutions for challenges in the space of healthy aging and digital health, while focusing on senior citizens. In early 2015, he also co-founded MDClone, which introduced the world’s first Healthcare Data Sandbox, unlocking healthcare data to enable exploration, discovery and collaboration. Previously, he served as the chief financial officer of the Nasdaq-listed company, Pluristem Therapeutics, a stem-cell development company, from 2013 to 2015. He also served as the chief financial officer of STARLIMS, a Nasdaq listed company, until it was acquired by Abbott Laboratories in 2010, after which he served as the chief financial officer of Abbott’s informatics division until 2013. Mr. Gur-Lavie is a certified public accountant and received his B.A. in economics and M.B.A. in finance from the Ben-Gurion University in Israel.

Lior Rosenberg is one of our co‑founders and has served as our Chief Medical Technology Officer since 2001 and served as a member of our board of directors from 2001 to 2013. Since 2001, Dr. Rosenberg has headed the unit for Cleft Lip Palate and Craniofacial Deformities at Soroka University Medical Center and Meir Medical Centers in Beer Sheva and Kfar Saba, Israel, respectively. Since 1987, he has served as a Full Professor of plastic surgery at the Ben‑Gurion University Medical School in Beer Sheva, Israel. He also serves as the Chairman of the Burn Disaster Committee for the International Society of Burn Injuries and the Israeli Ministry of Health. From 1987 to 2012, Dr. Rosenberg served as the chairman of the Department of Plastic Surgery and Burn Unit at Soroka University Medical Center in Beer Sheva, Israel. He is a founding member of the Israeli Burn Association and the Mediterranean Burn Council, a member of the American Burn Association and a national representative at the European Burn Association. Dr. Rosenberg holds a M.D. degree from Tel‑Aviv University, Israel and a Professor of Plastic Surgery degree from the Ben Gurion University, Israel.

Ety Klinger has served as our Chief Research and Development Officer since May 2014. Prior to joining MediWound, Dr. Klinger was Vice President of Research and Development at Proteologics Ltd since July 2011, where she was responsible for discovery projects in the ubiquitin system, conducted in collaboration with GlaxoSmithKline plc and Teva. Prior to this, Dr. Klinger served for 17 years in numerous leadership positions at Teva’s global innovative R&D division and served as Teva’s Board representative at various biotechnology companies. Dr. Klinger was a key member of the Copaxone® development team. As a project leader she led the chemistry, manufacture and control, preclinical, clinical and post‑marketing R&D activities of various innovative treatments for multiple sclerosis (MS), autoimmune and neurological diseases. From 2006 to 2011, as a Senior Director at Teva, Dr. Klinger was a member of Teva’s global innovative R&D management team. From 2006 to 2008, she served as the Head of MS and Autoimmune Diseases at Teva, and led the Life Cycle Management (LCM) of innovative R&D. Dr. Klinger holds a B.Sc. in Biology from the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, a M.S. and a Ph.D. in Biochemistry from Tel‑Aviv University and an MBA degree from Tel Aviv University and Northwestern University.

Stephen T. Wills has served as a member of our board of directors since May 2017, as Chairman of our board since October 2017 and as Executive Chairman of our board since May 2019. Mr. Wills serves as Chief Financial Officer (since 1997) and Chief Operating Officer (since 2011) of Palatin Technologies, Inc. (NYSE: PTN), a biopharmaceutical company developing targeted, receptor‑specific peptide therapeutics for the treatment of diseases with significant unmet medical need and commercial potential. Mr. Wills serve on the boards of Gamida Cell Ltd. (Nasdaq: GMDA), a leading cellular and immune therapeutics company since March 2019 (audit and finance committee member) and of Amryt Pharma, a biopharmaceutical company focused on developing and delivering treatments to help improve lives of patients with rare and orphan diseases since September 2019 (chairman of audit committee and member of the finance committee). Mr. Wills also serves on the board of trustees and executive committee of The Hun School of Princeton, a college preparatory day and boarding school since 2013, and its chairman since June 2018. Mr. Wills served on the board of directors of Caliper Corporation, a psychological assessment and talent development company since March 2016 and as chairman since December 2016 do December 2019, when Caliper was acquired by PSI. Mr. Wills serves as executive chairman and interim principal executive officer of Derma Sciences Inc. a provider of advanced wound care product from December 2015 to February 2017, when Derma Sciences was acquired by Integra Lifesciences (Nasdaq: IART). Previously, Mr. Wills served on the Board of Derma Sciences as the lead director and chairman of the audit committee from June 2000 to December 2015. Mr. Wills served as the Chief Financial Officer of Derma Sciences from 1997 to 2000. Mr. Wills served as the president and Chief Operating Officer of Wills, Owens & Baker, P.C., a public accounting firm from 1991 to 2000. Mr. Wills, a certified public accountant, earned his Bachelor of Science in accounting from West Chester University, and a Master of Science in taxation from Temple University.

Ofer Gonen has served as a member of our board of directors since September 2003. Mr. Gonen is the Chief Executive Officer of Clal Biotechnology Industries Ltd. (TASE: CBI) and Cactus Acquisition Corp. 1 (Nasdaq: CCTS). Mr. Gonen has more than 20 years of experience in managing life science investments and business collaborations in both the US and Israel. Mr. Gonen serves as a board member of several private and publicly-traded portfolio companies of CBI, including Gamida Cell (Nasdaq: GMDA), MediWound (Nasdaq: MDWD) and Cactus (Nasdaq: CCTS), as well as a managing partner at the Anatomy Medical Fund. Before joining CBI, Mr. Gonen was the General Manager of Biomedical Investments Ltd., a partner at Arte Venture Group, as well as a technology consultant to various Israeli venture capital funds. Mr. Gonen gained extensive experience in R&D and management of defense-oriented projects at the prestigious “Talpiot” program of the Israeli Defense Forces. He holds a B.Sc. in Physics, Mathematics and Chemistry from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and an M.A. in Economics and Finance from Tel Aviv University, with distinction.

Assaf Segalhas served as a member of our board of directors since October 2017. Mr. Segal serves as a board member of several companies, including Biokine therapeutics Ltd., Campus Bio L.P., Clal Life Sciences L.P. and Clal Application Center Ltd. Prior to that time, Mr. Segal was a Partner at Variance Economic Consulting Ltd., from 2004 until June 2015, where he provided in‑depth consulting for international and local clients in a wide range of industries, including telecommunications, internet, biotech, heavy industry and financial sectors. Previously, he founded a start‑up software company. Mr. Segal also previously held a managerial position at PriceWaterhouseCoopers Corporate Finance and was an Economic Department manager at the North American division of Amdocs Inc. His experience also includes risk management and house account (“Nostro”) trading at the Union Bank of Israel, and serving as an economist for capital markets in the Research Department of the Bank of Israel. Mr. Segal also has many years of experience in economic consulting and company valuations, joint ventures and financial instruments for investments, M&A, and IPOs. He has 15 years of experience in economic consulting for international and local clients in the Bio‑Tech sector as well as in Hi‑Tech, financial and other sectors. He holds a B.A. in Economics and Statistics and an M.B.A. (Finance and Information Systems) from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.

Vickie R. Driverhas served as a member of our board of directors since May 2017. Dr. Driver is board certified in foot surgery by the American Board of Podiatric Surgery and is a Fellow at the American College of Foot and Ankle Surgeons, licensed in Rhode Island. Her career as a podiatric physician and surgeon has included a special emphasis on limb preservation and wound healing in her medical practice, as well as, research and education. Dr. Driver has been a Professor of Surgery in the Department of Orthopedics at Brown University (Clinical) since 2014. She has served for 9 years on the Board of Directors for the Association for the Advancement of Wound Care (“AAWC”), and recently completed her tenure as President for this international organization. Dr. Driver is also the chair of Wound Care Experts and U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) Clinical Endpoints Project. She has just been named to serve as member at large to the Board of Directors of the Wound Healing Society (“WHS”) and Board Member to the Critical Limb Ischemia (“CLI”) Global Society. In addition, she serves on multiple national and international clinical committees that focus on preventing limb loss and improving wound healing in the high‑risk population. She has served as an investigator for more than 70 important multi‑center randomized clinical trials, as well as developed and supervised multiple research fellowship training programs. She has served and chaired multiple committees for large national and international pivotal clinical trials and has authored over 120 publications and abstracts. Dr. Driver is credited with the development and directorship of multiple major multidisciplinary Limb Preservation– Wound Healing Centers of Excellence, including Military/VA, Hospital and University based programs. Since 2015, she has served as Director, Translational Medicine, Wound Healing at the Novartis Institute for Biomedical Research. From 2011 to 2014, she was Program Director, Inaugural Educational Committee at the American College of Wound Healing and Tissue Repair at University of Illinois School of Medicine. From 2011 to 2015, she was also Scientific Director, Colorado Prevention Center, Wound Care Laboratory at the University of Colorado. From 2012 to 2015, Dr. Driver held a number of positions at the Providence Veterans Administration Medical Center in Rhode Island, including Chief, Section of Podiatric Surgery and Director, Clinical Research, Limb Preservation and Wound Healing. Prior thereto, she held various positions at multiple major multidisciplinary Limb Preservation – Wound Healing Centers of Excellence. Dr. Driver received a Doctorate of Podiatric Medicine and Surgery from the California College of Podiatric Medicine and Surgery and a Masters in Medical Education from Samuel Merritt University.

Nissim Mashiach has served as a member of our board of directors since June 2017. Mr. Mashiach served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Macrocure Ltd., a Nasdaq‑listed biotechnology company focused on the treatment of chronic and other hard‑to‑heal wounds, from June 2012 to January 2017. From 2009 to 2012, he served as General Manager at Ethicon, a Johnson & Johnson company. Prior to Ethicon, he served as President and Chief Operating Officer at Omrix Biopharmaceuticals, Inc., which was acquired by Johnson & Johnson in 2008. Prior to Omrix, Mr. Mashiach held leadership positions at several pharmaceutical companies. He holds an MBA from the University of Manchester in Manchester, England, an MPharmSc from the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, Israel, and a B.Sc, Chemical Engineering from the Technion‑Israel Institute of Technology in Haifa, Israel.

Sharon Kochan has served as a member of our board of directors since June 2017. Mr. Kochan is the CEO of Padagis LLC. a leading specialty pharma company that was curved out of Perrigo Company PLC. On July 2021. Prior to such, Mr. Kochan has served as Executive Vice President & President Pharmaceuticals / International, for Perrigo Company Plc., a global, over-the-counter, consumer goods and specialty pharmaceutical company listed on the New York Stock Exchange, since 2012 and has been a member of the Perrigo Executive Committee since 2007. From March 2007 to July 2012, he served as Executive Vice President, General Manager of Prescription Pharmaceuticals for Perrigo and from 2005 to 2007, he was Senior Vice President of Business Development and Strategy for Perrigo. Mr. Kochan was Vice President, Business Development of Agis Industries (1983) Ltd. from 2001 until Perrigo acquired Agis in 2005. He completed the Senior Management Program at the Technion Institute of Management in Haifa, Israel, received a Master of Science in Operations Research & Management Science from Columbia University in New York City and received a Bachelor of Science in Industrial and Management Engineering from Tel-Aviv University in Tel-Aviv, Israel.

Mr. Samuel Moed has served as a member of our board of directors since April 2020. Prior to joining our board, Mr. Moed served as an executive at Bristol-Myers Squibb, a global biopharma company focused on innovative therapeutics. In his most recent capacity as Senior Vice President, Corporate Strategy, Mr. Moed led the strategic planning of the company in all major business activities worldwide. Previously, Mr. Moed oversaw strategy for BMS’ Worldwide Pharmaceuticals Group, encompassing a range of global strategic initiatives, and managed a global portfolio of strategic alliances. Among other positions, he served as President of U.S. Pharmaceuticals and as President of Worldwide Consumer Healthcare. Mr. Moed received a BA in history from Columbia University in New York City.

Mr. David Fox has served as a member of our board of directors since April 2020. Mr. Fox was most recently a partner at Kirkland & Ellis LLP and served as a member of its Global Executive Management Committee until 2019. Prior to joining Kirkland, Mr. Fox was partner with Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, where he was a member of its top governing committee. Mr. Fox is a director of Israel Discount Bank of New York, a member of the borad of directors at the Park Avenue Armory and a member of the advisory board of New Alternatives for Children, for which he provides support to families caring for medically fragile children. In addition, Mr. Fox serves on the board of governors, and is an honorary fellow of the Hebrew University, Jerusalem. He holds an LL.B. degree from Jerusalem University, Israel.

The table below reflects the compensation granted to our five most highly compensated officers during or with respect to the year ended December 31, 2021. All amounts reported in the table reflect the cost to the company, as recognized in our financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2021.

The aggregate compensation paid and equity‑based compensation and other payments expensed by us and our subsidiaries to our directors and executive officers with respect to the year ended December 31, 2021 was $3.5 million. As of December 31, 2021, options to purchase 1,811,319 ordinary shares, exercisable at a weighted average exercise price of $3.86 per share, and restricted share units (“RSUs”) that may be settled for 55,002 ordinary shares, in each case granted to our directors and executive officers, were outstanding under our equity incentive plans. We do not have any written agreements with any director providing for benefits upon the termination of such director’s relationship with our company or its subsidiaries.

We have entered into written employment agreements with all of our executive officers, which include standard provisions for a company in our industry regarding non‑competition/solicitation, confidentiality of information and assignment of inventions. Except for Prof. Rosenberg, our Chief Medical Officer, our executive officers will not receive benefits upon the termination of their respective employment with us, other than payment of salary and benefits (and limited accrual of vacation days) during the required notice period for termination of their employment, which varies for each individual. Upon termination of his employment, Prof. Rosenberg is entitled to a one‑time termination payment of ten months of salary.

Other than with respect to our directors that are also executive officers, there are no arrangements or understandings between us, on the one hand, and any of our directors, on the other hand, providing for benefits upon termination of their service as directors of our company.

In November 2003, we adopted our 2003 Israeli Share Option Plan (the “2003 Plan”). The 2003 Plan provides for the grant of options to our and our subsidiaries’ directors, employees, officers, consultants and service providers, among others. 

The initial reserved pool under the 2003 Plan was 1,710,000 ordinary shares and subsequently increased to a total of 3,230,000 ordinary shares. The 2003 Plan expired on December 31, 2013. Options that remain outstanding under the 2003 Plan continue to be governed by the terms of the plan, notwithstanding that expiration.  The 2003 Plan is administered by our board of directors or a committee designated by our board of directors, which determines, subject to Israeli law, the grantees of options, the terms of the options, including exercise prices, vesting schedules, acceleration of vesting, the type of option and the other matters necessary or desirable for, or incidental to the administration of the 2003 Plan. The 2003 Plan provides for the issuance of options under various tax regimes including, without limitation, pursuant to Sections 102 and 3(i) of the Israeli Income Tax Ordinance (New Version) 1961 (the “Ordinance”).

Section 102 of the Ordinance allows employees, directors and officers who are not controlling shareholders and who are Israeli residents to receive favorable tax treatment for compensation in the form of shares or options. Section 102 of the Ordinance includes two alternatives for tax treatment involving the issuance of options or shares to a trustee for the benefit of the grantees and also includes an additional alternative for the issuance of options or shares directly to the grantee. Section 102(b)(2) of the Ordinance, which provides the most favorable tax treatment for grantees, permits the issuance to a trustee under the “capital gains track.” In order to comply with the terms of the capital gains track, all options granted under a specific plan and subject to the provisions of Section 102 of the Ordinance, as well as the shares issued upon exercise of such options and other shares received following any realization of rights with respect to such options, such as share dividends and share splits, must be registered in the name of a trustee selected by the board of directors and held in trust for the benefit of the relevant employee, director or officer. The trustee may not release these options or shares to the relevant grantee before the second anniversary of the registration of the options in the name of the trustee. However, under this track, we are not allowed to deduct an expense with respect to the issuance of the options or shares.

The 2003 Plan provides that options granted to our employees, directors and officers who are not controlling shareholders and who are considered Israeli residents are intended to qualify for special tax treatment under the “capital gains track” provisions of Section 102(b)(2) of the Ordinance. Our Israeli non‑employee service providers and controlling shareholders may only be granted options under Section 3(i) of the Ordinance, which does not provide for similar tax benefits.

Options granted under the 2003 Plan are subject to vesting schedules and generally expire ten years from approval of the option and vest over a four‑year period commencing on the date of grant, such that 25% of the granted options vest annually on each of the first, second, third and fourth anniversaries of the date of grant. Under the 2003 Plan, in the event of termination of employment or services for reasons of disability or death, the grantee, or in the case of death, his or her legal successor, may exercise options that have vested prior to termination within a period of six months after the date of termination. If a grantee’s employment or service is terminated for cause, all of the grantee’s vested and unvested options expire on the date of termination. If a grantee’s employment or service is terminated for any other reason, the grantee may exercise his or her vested options within 90 days after the date of termination. Any expired or unvested options are returned to the pool for reissuance.

The 2003 Plan provides that in the event of a merger or consolidation of our company or a sale of all, or substantially all, of our assets, the unexercised options outstanding may be assumed, or substituted for an appropriate number of shares of each class of shares or other securities as were distributed to our shareholders in connection with such transaction and the exercise price will be appropriately adjusted. If not so assumed or substituted, all non‑vested and non‑exercised options will expire upon the closing of the transaction. Our board of directors or its designated committee, as applicable, may provide in the option agreement that if the acquirer does not agree to assume or substitute the options, vesting of the options shall be accelerated so that any unvested option or any portion thereof will vest 10 days prior to the closing of the transaction. In the event that such consideration received in the transaction is not solely in the form of ordinary shares of another company, the board of directors or the designated committee, as applicable, may, with the approval of the acquirer, provide that in lieu of the assumption or substitution of the options, the options will be substituted by another type of asset or property, including cash.

In March 2014, we adopted and obtained shareholder approval for our 2014 Equity Incentive Plan, which was amended as of December 18, 2018 (the “2014 Plan”). The 2014 Plan provides for the grant of options, restricted shares, RSUs and other share‑based awards to our and our subsidiaries’ and affiliates’ directors, employees, officers, consultants and advisors, among others and to any other person whose services are considered valuable to us or them, to continue as service providers, to increase their efforts on our behalf or behalf of a subsidiary or affiliate and to promote the success of our business. Following the approval of the 2014 Plan by the Israeli tax authorities, we are only granting options or other equity incentive awards under the 2014 Plan, although previously‑granted options and awards will continue to be governed by our 2003 Plan and the shares underlying such options and awards will count against the reserved pool for the 2014 Plan. The initial reserved pool under the 2014 Plan was 3,032,742 ordinary shares, which will automatically increase on January 1 of each year by a number of ordinary shares equal to the lowest of (i) 2% of our outstanding shares, (ii) 600,000 shares and (iii) a number of shares determined by our board of directors, if so determined prior to January 1 of the year in which the increase will occur; provided that the pool of shares reserved under the Plan shall not exceed 15% (fifteen percent) of the then outstanding shares. Pursuant to an “evergreen” provision in the 2014 Plan, the reserved pool was increased by 431,006, 540,955, 543,577, 544,055 and 544,738 ordinary shares as of January 1, 2015, January 1, 2018, January 1, 2019, January 1, 2020 and January 1, 2021  , respectively, representing 2% of our outstanding shares as of each such date. We did not increase the reserved pool in 2016 or 2017.

The 2014 Plan is administered by our board of directors or by a committee designated by the board of directors, which determine, subject to Israeli law, the grantees of awards and the terms of the grant, including exercise prices, vesting schedules, acceleration of vesting and the other matters necessary in the administration of the 2014 Plan. The 2014 Plan enables us to issue awards under various tax regimes, including, without limitation, pursuant to Sections 102 and 3(i) of the Ordinance, as discussed under “—2003 Share Incentive Plan” above, and under Section 422 of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”).

Options granted under the 2014 Plan to U.S. residents may qualify as “incentive stock options” within the meaning of Section 422 of the Code, or may be non‑qualified. The exercise price for “incentive stock options” must not be less than the fair market value on the date on which an option is granted, or 110% of the fair market value if the option holder holds more than 10% of our share capital.

We currently intend to grant awards under the 2014 Plan under the capital gains track of Section 102(b)(2) of the Ordinance only to our employees, directors and officers who are not controlling shareholders and are considered Israeli residents.

Awards under the 2014 Plan may be granted until ten years from the date on which the 2014 Plan was approved by our board of directors.

Options granted under the 2014 Plan generally vest over three or four years commencing on the date of grant, such that 33% or 25%, respectively, vests annually on the anniversary of the date of grant. Options, other than certain incentive share options, that are not exercised within ten years from the grant date expire, unless otherwise determined by our board of directors or its designated committee, as applicable. Share options that qualify as “incentive stock options” and are granted to a person holding more than 10% of our voting power will expire within five years from the date of the grant. In the event of the death of a grantee while employed by or performing service for us or a subsidiary or within three months thereafter, or the termination of a grantee’s employment or services for reasons of disability, the grantee, or in the case of death, his or her legal successor, may exercise options that have vested prior to termination within a period of one year from the date of disability or death. If we terminate a grantee’s employment or service for cause, all of the grantee’s vested and unvested options will expire on the date of termination. If a grantee’s employment or service is terminated for any other reason, the grantee may exercise his or her vested options within three months of the date of termination. Any expired or unvested options return to the pool for reissuance.

In the event of a merger or consolidation of our company or a sale of all, or substantially all, of our shares or assets or other transaction having a similar effect on us, then without the consent of the option holder, our board of directors or its designated committee, as applicable, may but is not required to (i) cause any outstanding award to be assumed or an equivalent award to be substituted by such successor corporation, or (ii) in case the successor corporation refuses to assume or substitute the award (a) provide the grantee with the option to exercise the award as to all or part of the shares or (b) cancel the options against payment in cash in an amount determined by the board of directors or the committee as fair in the circumstances. Notwithstanding the foregoing, our board of directors or its designated committee may upon such event amend or terminate the terms of any award, including conferring the right to purchase any other security or asset that the board of directors shall deem, in good faith, appropriate. Our board of directors or its designated committee may, in its discretion, approve that any awards granted under the 2014 Plan shall be subject to additional conditions in the case of a merger or a consolidation.

Restricted share awards are ordinary shares that are awarded to a participant subject to the satisfaction of the terms and conditions established by the board of directors or a committee designated by the board of directors. Until such time as the applicable restrictions lapse, restricted shares are subject to forfeiture and may not be sold, assigned, pledged or otherwise disposed of by the participant who holds those shares. Generally, if a grantee’s employment or service is terminated for any reason prior to the expiration of the time when the restrictions lapse, shares that are still restricted will be forfeited.

The following table provides information regarding the outstanding options to purchase our ordinary shares, and RSUs held by each of our directors and executive officers who beneficially owns greater than 1% of our ordinary shares (after including shares underlying options or RSUs) as of March 15, 2022:

Under the Israeli Companies Law, the management of our company is vested in our board of directors. Our board of directors may exercise all powers and may take all actions that are not specifically granted to our shareholders or to management. Our executive officers are responsible for our day‑to‑day management and have individual responsibilities established by our board of directors. Our Chief Executive Officer is appointed by, and serves at the discretion of, our board of directors, subject to the employment agreement that we have entered into with him. All other executive officers are also appointed by our board of directors, and are subject to the terms of any applicable employment agreements that we may enter into with them.

Under our articles of association, our board of directors must consist of at least five and not more than nine directors, including at least two external directors required to be appointed under the Israeli Companies Law. At any time the minimum number of directors (other than the external directors) shall not fall below three. Other than external directors, for whom special election requirements apply under the Israeli Companies Law, as detailed below, the Israeli Companies Law and our articles of association provide that directors are elected annually at the general meeting of our shareholders by a vote of the holders of a majority of the voting power represented present and voting, in person or by proxy, at that meeting. We have only one class of directors.

In accordance with the exemption available to foreign private issuers under Nasdaq rules, we are not required to comply with the requirements of the Nasdaq rules with regard to having a majority of independent directors on our board of directors, as long as we follow Israeli law and practice, in accordance with which our board of directors includes at least two external directors. Our board of directors has determined that four of our six current directors are independent under the Nasdaq Stock Market listing rules. The definition of “independent director” under the Nasdaq Stock Market listing rules and “external director” under the Israeli Companies Law overlap to a significant degree such that we would generally expect the two directors that serve as external directors to qualify as independent under the Nasdaq Stock Market listing rules. However, it is possible for a director to qualify as an “external director” under the Israeli Companies Law without qualifying as an “independent director” under the Nasdaq Stock Market listing rules, or vice‑versa. The definition of external director under the Israeli Companies Law includes a set of statutory criteria that must be satisfied, including criteria whose aim is to ensure that there is no factor that would impair the ability of the external director to exercise independent judgment. The definition of independent director under the Nasdaq Stock Market listing rules specifies similar, although less stringent, requirements in addition to the requirement that the board of directors consider any factor which would impair the ability of the independent director to exercise independent judgment. In addition, external directors serve for a period of three years pursuant to the requirements of the Israeli Companies Law. However, external directors must be elected by a special majority of shareholders while independent directors may be elected by an ordinary majority. See “—External Directors” for a description of the requirements under the Israeli Companies Law for a director to serve as an external director.

In accordance with the exemption available to foreign private issuers under Nasdaq rules, we do not follow the requirements of the Nasdaq rules with regard to the process of nominating directors, and instead follow Israeli law and practice, in accordance with which our board of directors (or a committee thereof) is authorized to recommend to our shareholders director nominees for election.

Under the Israeli Companies Law and our articles of association, nominees for directors may also be proposed by any shareholder holding at least 1% of our outstanding voting power. However, any such shareholder may propose a nominee only if a written notice of such shareholder’s intent to propose a nominee has been given to our Secretary (or, if we have no such Secretary, our Chief Executive Officer). Pursuant to our Articles of Association, any such notice must include certain information, including, among other things, a description of all arrangements between the nominating shareholder and the proposed director nominee(s) and any other person pursuant to which the nomination(s) are to be made by the nominating shareholder, the consent of the proposed director nominee(s) to serve as our director(s) if elected and a declaration signed by the nominee(s) declaring that there is no limitation under the Israeli Companies Law preventing their election, and that all of the information that is required under the Israeli Companies Law to be provided to us in connection with such election has been provided. Under the Israeli Companies Law regulations, any such shareholder nomination must be delivered to our registered Israeli office within seven days after we publish notice of our upcoming annual general meeting of shareholders (or within 14 days after we publish a preliminary notification of an upcoming annual general meeting).

In addition, our articles of association allow our board of directors to appoint directors to fill vacancies on our board of directors for a term of office equal to the remaining period of the term of office of the director(s) whose office(s) have been vacated. External directors are elected for an initial term of three years and may be elected for additional three‑year terms under the circumstances described below. External directors may be removed from office only under the limited circumstances set forth in the Israeli Companies Law. See “—External Directors.”

Under the Israeli Companies Law, our board of directors must determine the minimum number of directors who are required to have accounting and financial expertise. See “—External Directors” below. In determining the number of directors required to have such expertise, our board of directors must consider, among other things, the type and size of the company and the scope and complexity of its operations. Our board of directors has determined that the minimum number of directors of our company who are required to have accounting and financial expertise is one.

We are not a party to, and are not aware of, any voting agreements among our shareholders. In addition, there are no family relationships among our executive officers and directors.

Under regulations promulgated under the Israeli Companies Law, Israeli public companies whose shares are traded on certain U.S. stock exchanges, such as the Nasdaq Global Market, and that lack a controlling shareholder (as defined below) are exempt from the requirement to appoint external directors. Any such company is also exempt from the Israeli Companies Law requirements related to the composition of the audit and compensation committees of the Board. Eligibility for these exemptions is conditioned on compliance with U.S. stock exchange listing rules related to majority Board independence and the composition of the audit and compensation committees of the Board, as applicable to all listed domestic U.S. companies. Because we have a controlling shareholder (CBI), we are not eligible for these exemptions under these regulations.

Under the Israeli Companies Law, our board of directors is required to include at least two members who qualify as external directors. Our current external directors are Nissim Mashiach and Sharon Kochan, each of whom serves on our audit committee and compensation committee.

The provisions of the Israeli Companies Law set forth special approval requirements for the election of external directors. External directors must be elected by a majority vote of the shares present and voting at a meeting of shareholders, provided that either:

The term “controlling shareholder” as used in the Israeli Companies Law for purposes of all matters related to external directors and for certain other purposes (such as the requirements related to appointment to the audit committee or compensation committee, as described below), means a shareholder with the ability to direct the activities of the company, other than by virtue of being an office holder. A shareholder is presumed to be a controlling shareholder if the shareholder holds 50% or more of the voting rights in a company or has the right to appoint the majority of the directors of the company or its general manager. With respect to certain matters (various related party transactions), a controlling shareholder is deemed to include a shareholder that holds 25% or more of the voting rights in a public company if no other shareholder holds more than 50% of the voting rights in the company, but excludes a shareholder whose power derives solely from his or her position as a director of the company or from any other position with the company.

The initial term of an external director is three years. Thereafter, an external director may be reelected by shareholders to serve in that capacity for up to two additional three‑year terms, provided that either:

The term of office for external directors for Israeli companies traded on certain foreign stock exchanges, including the Nasdaq Global Market, may be extended indefinitely in increments of additional three‑year terms, in each case provided that the audit committee and the board of directors of the company confirm that, in light of the external director’s expertise and special contribution to the work of the board of directors and its committees, the reelection for such additional period(s) is beneficial to the company, and provided that the external director is reelected subject to the same shareholder vote requirements (as described above regarding the reelection of external directors). Prior to the approval of the reelection of the external director at a general meeting of shareholders, the company’s shareholders must be informed of the term previously served by him or her and of the reasons why the board of directors and audit committee recommended the extension of his or her term.

External directors may be removed from office by a special general meeting of shareholders called by the board of directors, which approves such dismissal by the same shareholder vote percentage required for their election or by a court, in each case, only under limited circumstances, including ceasing to meet the statutory qualifications for appointment, or violating their duty of loyalty to the company.

If an external directorship becomes vacant and there are fewer than two external directors on the board of directors at the time, then the board of directors is required under the Israeli Companies Law to call a shareholders’ meeting as soon as practicable to appoint a replacement external director. Each committee of the board of directors that exercises the powers of the board of directors must include at least one external director, except that the audit committee and the compensation committee must include all external directors then serving on the board of directors and an external director must serve as chair thereof. Under the Israeli Companies Law, external directors of a company are prohibited from receiving, directly or indirectly, any compensation from the company other than for their services as external directors pursuant to the Israeli Companies Law and the regulations promulgated thereunder. Compensation of an external director is determined prior to his or her appointment and may not be changed during his or her term subject to certain exceptions.

The Israeli Companies Law provides that a person is not qualified to be appointed as an external director if (i) the person is a relative of a controlling shareholder of the company, or (ii) if that person or his or her relative, partner, employer, another person to whom he or she was directly or indirectly subordinate, or any entity under the person’s control, has or had, during the two years preceding the date of appointment as an external director: (a) any affiliation or other disqualifying relationship with the company, with any person or entity controlling the company or a relative of such person, or with any entity controlled by or under common control with the company; or (b) in the case of a company with no shareholder holding 25% or more of its voting rights, had at the date of appointment as an external director, any affiliation or other disqualifying relationship with a person then serving as chairman of the board or chief executive officer, a holder of 5% or more of the issued share capital or voting power in the company or the most senior financial officer.

The term “relative” is defined in the Israeli Companies Law as a spouse, sibling, parent, grandparent or descendant; spouse’s sibling, parent or descendant; and the spouse of each of the foregoing persons. Under the Israeli Companies Law, the term “affiliation” and the similar types of disqualifying relationships include (subject to certain exceptions):

The term “office holder” is defined in the Israeli Companies Law as a general manager (i.e., chief executive officer), chief business manager, deputy general manager, vice general manager, any other person assuming the responsibilities of any of these positions regardless of that person’s title, a director and any other manager directly subordinate to the general manager.

In addition, no person may serve as an external director if that person’s position or professional or other activities create, or may create, a conflict of interest with that person’s responsibilities as a director or otherwise interfere with that person’s ability to serve as an external director or if the person is an employee of the Israel Securities Authority of an Israeli stock exchange. A person may furthermore not continue to serve as an external director if he or she received direct or indirect compensation from the company including amounts paid pursuant to indemnification or exculpation contracts or commitments and insurance coverage for his or her service as an external director, other than as permitted by the Israeli Companies Law and the regulations promulgated thereunder.

Following the termination of an external director’s service on a board of directors, such former external director and his or her spouse and children may not be provided a direct or indirect benefit by the company, its controlling shareholder or any entity under its controlling shareholder’s control. This includes engagement as an office holder of the company or a company controlled by its controlling shareholder or employment by, or provision of services to, any such company for consideration, either directly or indirectly, including through a corporation controlled by the former external director. This restriction extends for a period of two years with regard to the former external director and his or her spouse or child and for one year with respect to other relatives of the former external director.

If at the time at which an external director is appointed all members of the board of directors who are not controlling shareholders or relatives of controlling shareholders of the company are of the same gender, the external director to be appointed must be of the other gender. A director of one company may not be appointed as an external director of another company if a director of the other company is acting as an external director of the first company at such time.

According to the Israeli Companies Law and regulations promulgated thereunder, a person may be appointed as an external director only if he or she has professional qualifications or if he or she has accounting and financial expertise (each, as defined below); provided that at least one of the external directors must be determined by our board of directors to have accounting and financial expertise. However, if at least one of our other directors (i) meets the independence requirements under the Exchange Act, (ii) meets the standards of the Nasdaq Stock Market listing rules for membership on the audit committee and (iii) has accounting and financial expertise as defined under the Israeli Companies Law, then neither of our external directors is required to possess accounting and financial expertise as long as each possesses the requisite professional qualifications.

A director with accounting and financial expertise is a director who, due to his or her education, experience and skills, possesses an expertise in, and an understanding of, financial and accounting matters and financial statements, such that he or she is able to understand the financial statements of the company and initiate a discussion about the presentation of financial data. A director is deemed to have professional qualifications if he or she has any of (i) an academic degree in economics, business management, accounting, law or public administration, (ii) an academic degree or has completed another form of higher education in the primary field of business of the company or in a field which is relevant to his/her position in the company or (iii) at least five years of experience serving in one of the following capacities, or at least five years of cumulative experience serving in two or more of the following capacities: (a) a senior business management position in a company with a significant volume of business, (b) a senior position in the company’s primary field of business or (c) a senior position in public administration or service. The board of directors is charged with determining whether a director possesses financial and accounting expertise or professional qualifications.

Our board of directors has determined that Sharon Kochan has accounting and financial expertise and possesses professional qualifications as required under the Israeli Companies Law, while Nissim Mashiach possesses professional qualifications.

In accordance with the Israeli Companies Law and our articles of association, our board of directors is required to appoint one of its members to serve as chairman of the board of directors. Our board of directors has appointed Stephen T. Wills to serve as executive chairman of the board of directors.

Under the Israeli Companies Law, we are required to have an audit committee comprised of at least three directors, including all of the external directors, one of whom must serve as chairman of the committee. The audit committee may not include the chairman of the board, a controlling shareholder of the company, a relative of a controlling shareholder, a director employed by or providing services on a regular basis to the company, to a controlling shareholder or to an entity controlled by a controlling shareholder, or a director who derives most of his or her income from a controlling shareholder. In addition, under the Israeli Companies Law, the audit committee of a publicly traded company must consist of a majority of unaffiliated directors. In general, an “unaffiliated director’’ under the Israeli Companies Law is defined as either an external director or as a director who meets the following criteria:

Each member of our audit committee (each, as identified in the second paragraph under the sub-heading “Nasdaq listing rules composition requirements” below) is an unaffiliated director under the Israeli Companies Law, thereby fulfilling the foregoing Israeli law requirement for the composition of the audit committee.

Under the Nasdaq Stock Market listing rules, we are required to maintain an audit committee consisting of at least three independent directors, each of whom is financially literate and one of whom has accounting or related financial management expertise. If we choose to follow requirements under Israeli law in lieu of those Nasdaq requirements, we must disclose that fact in this annual report.

Our audit committee consists of Sharon Kochan (chairperson), Nissim Mashiach and Vickie R Driver, each of whom is an independent director in accordance with Rule 10A‑3(b)(1) under the Exchange Act and satisfies the independent director requirements under the Nasdaq Stock Market listing rules. All members of our audit committee meet the requirements for financial literacy under the applicable listing rules of the Nasdaq Stock Market. Our board of directors has determined that Sharon Kochan is an “audit committee financial expert,” as defined in the SEC regulations.

Our board of directors has adopted an audit committee charter that sets forth the responsibilities of the audit committee consistent with the rules and regulations of the SEC and the Nasdaq Stock Market listing rules, as well as the requirements for such committee under the Israeli Companies Law, including the following:

Our audit committee provides assistance to our board of directors in fulfilling its legal and fiduciary obligations in matters involving our accounting, auditing, financial reporting, internal control and legal compliance functions by pre‑approving the services performed by our independent accountants and reviewing their reports regarding our accounting practices and systems of internal control over financial reporting. Our audit committee also oversees the audit efforts of our independent accountants and takes those actions that it deems necessary to satisfy itself that the accountants are independent of management.

Our audit committee may not approve any actions requiring its approval (see “—Approval of Related Party Transactions Under Israeli Law”), unless at the time of the approval a majority of the committee’s members are present, which majority consists of unaffiliated directors including at least one external director.

Under the Israeli Companies Law, the board of directors of a public company must appoint a compensation committee. The compensation committee generally (subject to certain exceptions that do not apply to our company) must be comprised of at least three directors, including all of the external directors, who must constitute a majority of the members of, and include the chairperson of, the compensation committee. Each compensation committee member who is not an external director must be a director whose compensation does not exceed an amount that may be paid to an external director. The compensation committee is subject to the same Israeli Companies Law restrictions as the audit committee as to who may not be a member of the compensation committee. Each member of our compensation committee (each, as identified in the second paragraph under the sub-heading “Nasdaq listing rules compensation committee composition requirements” below) fulfills the foregoing Israeli law requirements related to the composition of the compensation committee.

The duties of the compensation committee include the recommendation to the company’s board of directors of a policy regarding the terms of engagement of office holders, which we refer to as a compensation policy. That policy must be adopted by the company’s board of directors, after considering the recommendations of the compensation committee, and must be approved by the company’s shareholders, which approval requires what we refer to as a Special Majority Approval for Compensation. A Special Majority Approval for Compensation requires shareholder approval by a majority vote of the shares present and voting at a meeting of shareholders called for such purpose, provided that either (a) such majority includes at least a majority of the shares held by all shareholders who are not controlling shareholders and do not have a conflict of interest (referred to under the Israeli Companies Law as a “personal interest”) in such compensation arrangement or (b) the total number of shares of non-controlling shareholders and shareholders who do not have a personal interest in the compensation arrangement and who vote against the arrangement does not exceed 2% of the company’s aggregate voting rights.

We have adopted a compensation policy, most recently at the extraordinary general meeting of shareholders held on September 23, 2019, which policy serves as the basis for decisions concerning the financial terms of employment or engagement of office holders, including exculpation, insurance, indemnification or any monetary payment or obligation of payment or other benefit in respect of employment or engagement. Under the Israeli Companies Law, the compensation policy must relate to certain factors, including advancement of the company’s objectives, the company’s business plan and its long-term strategy, and creation of appropriate incentives for office holders. It must also consider, among other things, the company’s risk management, size and the nature of its operations. The compensation policy must furthermore consider the following additional factors:

The compensation policy must also include the following principles:

The compensation committee is responsible for (a) recommending the compensation policy to the company’s board of directors for its approval (and subsequent approval by its shareholders) and (b) duties related to the compensation policy and to the compensation of a company’s office holders as well as functions previously fulfilled by a company’s audit committee with respect to matters related to approval of the terms of engagement of office holders, including:

Under Nasdaq corporate governance rules, we are required to maintain a wholly-independent compensation committee consisting of at least two independent directors or, if we choose to follow requirements under Israeli law, we must disclose that fact in this annual report. Each of the members of the compensation committee is required to be independent under the Nasdaq rules relating to compensation committee members and Rule 10C‑1(b)(1) under the Exchange Act, which are different than the general test for independence of board members.

Our compensation committee consists of Nissim Mashiach (chairperson), Sharon Kochan and Samuel Moed, each of whom is an independent director under the Nasdaq Stock Market listing rules and each of whom satisfies the above-described additional requirements for compensation committee members under the Nasdaq rules and Exchange Act. 

Our board of directors has adopted a compensation committee charter setting forth the responsibilities of the compensation committee, which include:

Under the Israeli Companies Law, the board of directors of an Israeli public company must appoint an internal auditor recommended by the audit committee. An internal auditor may not be:

The role of the internal auditor is to examine, among other things, our compliance with applicable law and orderly business procedures.

The audit committee is required to oversee the activities and to assess the performance of the internal auditor as well as to review the internal auditor’s work plan. Our internal auditor is Mr. Yisrael Gewirtz.

The Israeli Companies Law codifies the fiduciary duties that office holders owe to a company. Each person listed in the table under “—Executive Officers and Directors” is an office holder under the Israeli Companies Law.

An office holder’s fiduciary duties consist of a duty of care and a duty of loyalty. The duty of care requires an office holder to act with the level of care with which a reasonable office holder in the same position would have acted under the same circumstances. The duty of loyalty requires that an office holder act in good faith and in the best interests of the company.

The duty of care includes a duty to use reasonable means to obtain:

The duty of loyalty includes a duty to:

The Israeli Companies Law requires that an office holder promptly disclose to the board of directors any personal interest that he or she may be aware of and all related material information or documents concerning any existing or proposed transaction with the company. An interested office holder’s disclosure must be made promptly and in any event no later than the first meeting of the board of directors at which the transaction is considered. A personal interest includes an interest of any person in an act or transaction of a company, including a personal interest of such person’s relative or of a corporate body in which such person or a relative of such person is a 5% or greater shareholder, director or general manager or in which he or she has the right to appoint at least one director or the general manager, but excluding a personal interest stemming from one’s ownership of shares in the company.

A personal interest furthermore includes the personal interest of a person for whom the office holder holds a voting proxy or the personal interest of the office holder with respect to his or her vote on behalf of a person for whom he or she holds a proxy even if such shareholder has no personal interest in the matter. An office holder is not, however, obliged to disclose a personal interest if it derives solely from the personal interest of his or her relative in a transaction that is not considered an extraordinary transaction. Under the Israeli Companies Law, an extraordinary transaction is defined as any of the following:

If it is determined that an office holder has a personal interest in a transaction which is not an extraordinary transaction, approval by the board of directors is required for the transaction, unless the company’s articles of association provide for a different method of approval. Further, so long as an office holder has disclosed his or her personal interest in a transaction, the board of directors may approve an action by the office holder that would otherwise be deemed a breach of his or her duty of loyalty. However, a company may not approve a transaction or action that is not in the best interest of the company or that is not performed by the office holder in good faith. An extraordinary transaction in which an office holder has a personal interest requires approval first by the company’s audit committee and subsequently by the board of directors. The compensation of, or an undertaking to indemnify or insure, an office holder who is not a director requires approval first by the company’s compensation committee, then by the company’s board of directors. If such compensation arrangement or an undertaking to indemnify or insure is inconsistent with the company’s stated compensation policy, or if the office holder is the chief executive officer (apart from a number of specific exceptions), then such arrangement is further subject to a Special Majority Approval for Compensation. Arrangements regarding the compensation, indemnification or insurance of a director require the approval of the compensation committee, board of directors and shareholders by ordinary majority, in that order, and under certain circumstances, a Special Majority Approval for Compensation.

Generally, a person who has a personal interest in a matter which is considered at a meeting of the board of directors or the audit committee may not be present at such a meeting or vote on that matter unless the chairman of the relevant committee or board of directors (as applicable) determines that he or she should be present in order to present the transaction that is subject to approval. If a majority of the members of the audit committee or the board of directors (as applicable) has a personal interest in the approval of a transaction, then all directors may participate in discussions of the audit committee or the board of directors (as applicable) on such transaction and the voting on approval thereof, but shareholder approval is also required for such transaction.

Pursuant to Israeli law, the disclosure requirements regarding personal interests that apply to directors and executive officers also apply to a controlling shareholder of a public company. In the context of a transaction involving a shareholder of the company, a controlling shareholder also includes a shareholder who holds 25% or more of the voting rights in the company if no other shareholder holds more than 50% of the voting rights in the company. For this purpose, the holdings of all shareholders who have a personal interest in the same transaction will be aggregated. The approval of the audit committee or the compensation committee, the board of directors and the shareholders of the company, in that order, is required for (a) extraordinary transactions with a controlling shareholder or in which a controlling shareholder has a personal interest, (b) the engagement with a controlling shareholder or his or her relative, directly or indirectly, including through a company under the control of the controlling shareholder, for the provision of services to the company, (c) the terms of engagement and compensation of a controlling shareholder or his or her relative who is an office holder or (d) the employment of a controlling shareholder or his or her relative by the company, other than as an office holder. In addition, the shareholder approval requires one of the following, which we refer to as a Special Majority:

To the extent that any such transaction with a controlling shareholder is for a period extending beyond three years, approval is required once every three years, unless, with respect to certain transactions, the audit committee determines that the duration of the transaction is reasonable given the circumstances related thereto. Arrangements regarding the compensation, indemnification or insurance of a controlling shareholder in his or her capacity as an office holder require the approval of the compensation committee, board of directors and shareholders by a Special Majority, in that order, and the terms thereof may not be inconsistent with the company’s stated compensation policy.

Pursuant to regulations promulgated under the Israeli Companies Law, certain transactions with a controlling shareholder or his or her relative, or with directors, that would otherwise require approval of a company’s shareholders may be exempt from shareholder approval upon certain determinations of the audit committee and board of directors.

As of March 15, 2022, Clal Biotechnology Industries Ltd. beneficially owned or controlled, directly and indirectly, 33.8% of our issued and outstanding ordinary shares and (assuming that no other shareholder holds more than 50% of the voting rights in our company) should therefore be deemed a “controlling shareholder” for purposes of the approval of related party transactions under the Israeli Companies Law.

Pursuant to the Israeli Companies Law, a shareholder has a duty to act in good faith and in a customary manner toward the company and other shareholders and to refrain from abusing his or her power in the company, including, among other things, in voting at a general meeting and at shareholder class meetings with respect to the following matters:

A shareholder also has a general duty to refrain from discriminating against other shareholders. In addition, certain shareholders have a duty of fairness toward the company. These shareholders include any controlling shareholder, any shareholder who knows that he or she has the power to determine the outcome of a shareholder vote and any shareholder who has the power to appoint or to prevent the appointment of an office holder of the company or other power towards the company. The Israeli Companies Law does not define the substance of the duty of fairness, except to state that the remedies generally available upon a breach of contract will also apply in the event of a breach of the duty to act with fairness.

Under the Israeli Companies Law, a company may not exculpate an office holder from liability for a breach of the duty of loyalty. An Israeli company may exculpate an office holder in advance from liability to the company, in whole or in part, for damages caused to the company as a result of a breach of duty of care but only if a provision authorizing such exculpation is included in its articles of association. Our articles of association include such a provision. A company may not exculpate in advance a director from liability arising out of a prohibited dividend or distribution to shareholders.

Under the Israeli Companies Law, a company may indemnify an office holder in respect of the following liabilities and expenses incurred for acts performed by him or her as an office holder, either pursuant to an undertaking made in advance of an event or following an event, provided its articles of association include a provision authorizing such indemnification:

Under the Israeli Companies Law, a company may insure an office holder against the following liabilities incurred for acts performed by him or her as an office holder, if and to the extent provided in the company’s articles of association:

Under the Israeli Companies Law, a company may not indemnify, exculpate or insure an office holder against any of the following:

Under the Israeli Companies Law, exculpation, indemnification and insurance of office holders in a public company must be approved by the compensation committee and the board of directors and, with respect to certain office holders or under certain circumstances, also by the shareholders. See “—Approval of Related Party Transactions Under Israeli Law.”

Our articles of association permit us to exculpate, indemnify and insure our office holders to the fullest extent permitted or to be permitted by the Israeli Companies Law. We have obtained directors’ and officers’ liability insurance for the benefit of our office holders and intend to continue to maintain such coverage and pay all premiums thereunder to the fullest extent permitted by the Israeli Companies Law. In addition, we have entered into agreements with each of our directors and executive officers exculpating them from liability to us for damages caused to us as a result of a breach of duty of care and undertaking to indemnify them, in each case, to the fullest extent permitted by our articles of association and Israeli Law.

The maximum indemnification amount set forth in those agreements is limited to an amount equal to the greater of (i) 25% of our total shareholders’ equity based on our most recently financial statements of the time of the actual payment of the indemnification; (ii) $50 million; (iii) 40% of our total market cap (which shall mean the average closing price of the Company’s ordinary shares over the 30 trading days prior to the actual payment of indemnification multiplied by the total number of issued and outstanding shares of the Company as of the date of actual payment); and (iv) in connection with or arising out of a public offering of our securities, the aggregate amount of proceeds from the sale by us and/or any shareholder of ours securities in such offering. The maximum amount set forth in those agreements is in addition to amounts actually paid, if any, under insurance policies and/or by a third-party pursuant to an indemnification arrangement.

As of December 31, 2021, we had 77 employees, 67 of whom were based in Israel and 10 based throughout Europe and employed by our German subsidiary. The distribution of our employees according to main areas of activity is as follows: 9 employees in the administrative department, 25 employees in the research and development department, 33 employees in the manufacturing department and 10 employees in the sales and marketing department. As of December 31, 2021, we did not employ a significant number of temporary employees.

Israeli labor laws govern the length of the workday and workweek, minimum wages for employees, procedures for hiring and dismissing employees, determination of severance pay, annual leave, sick days, advance notice of termination, payments to the National Insurance Institute and other conditions of employment, and include equal opportunity and anti-discrimination laws. While none of our employees is party to any collective bargaining agreements, certain provisions of the collective bargaining agreements between the Histadrut (General Federation of Labor in Israel) and the Coordination Bureau of Economic Organizations (including the Industrialists’ Associations) are applicable to our employees in Israel by order of the Israeli Ministry of the Economy. These provisions primarily concern pension fund benefits for all employees, insurance for work-related accidents, recuperation pay and travel expenses. We generally provide our employees with benefits and working conditions beyond the required minimums.

We have never experienced any employment-related work stoppages and believe our relationships with our employees are good.

For information regarding the share ownership of our directors and executive officers, see “ITEM 6.B. Compensation—2014 Equity Incentive Plan” and “ITEM 7.A. Major Shareholders.”

The following table sets forth information with respect to the beneficial ownership of our shares as of March 15, 2022 by:

The beneficial ownership of ordinary shares is determined in accordance with the rules of the SEC and generally includes any ordinary shares over which a person exercises sole or shared voting or investment power. The percentage of shares beneficially owned is based on 32,509,544 ordinary shares issued and outstanding as of March 15, 2022. Ordinary shares that are issuable under stock options or RSUs that are currently exercisable or exercisable within 60 days of March 15, 2022 are deemed to be outstanding and to be beneficially owned by the person holding the stock option for the purpose of computing the number of shares and percentage ownership of that person. Those shares are not deemed outstanding, however, for the purpose of computing the percentage ownership of any other person. The beneficial ownership does not include a 30 –day option to purchase up to an additional 781,249 ordinary shares that we gave to the Underwriters in relation with the public offering that we had in March 2022.

All of our shareholders, including the shareholders listed below, have the same voting rights attached to their ordinary shares. See “ITEM 10.B. Articles of Association.” None of our principal shareholders nor our directors or executive officers possesses different or special voting rights with respect to their ordinary shares. Unless otherwise noted below, each shareholder’s address is c/o MediWound Ltd., 42 Hayarkon Street, Yavne 8122745, Israel.

A description of any material relationship that our principal shareholders have had with us or any of our predecessors or affiliates within the past three years is included under “ITEM 7.B. Related Party Transactions.”

As of March 15, 2022, we had one holder of record of our ordinary shares in the United States, which is Cede & Co., the nominee of The Depository Trust Company. This shareholder held in the aggregate 64% of the 32,481,213 ordinary shares issued and outstanding as of March 15, 2022. The number of record holders in the United States is not representative of the number of beneficial holders nor is it representative of where such beneficial holders are resident since many of these ordinary shares were held by brokers or other nominees.

We have entered into an information rights agreement with CBI which provides CBI with certain information rights relating to our financial information of the company and certain other information necessary for CBI to meet Israeli Securities Law requirements. CBI is not required to reimburse us for expenses we incur in providing such information.

We are party to an amended and restated registration rights agreement, dated April 6, 2021, with certain of our shareholders (the “Registration Rights Agreement”). The Registration Rights Agreement, which was approved by our shareholders at our 2021 annual general meeting of shareholders, replaced the registration rights agreement, dated March 3, 2014 (the “Original Registration Rights Agreement”), that we  had entered into in connection with our initial public offering with certain of our pre-IPO shareholders, which expired by its own terms on its seven-year anniversary. The ordinary shares held by most of our pre-IPO shareholders who were party to the Original Registration Rights Agreement were no longer entitled to registration rights under that agreement as of the time that it expired, given their ability to freely sell their shares in the open market under Rule 144 of the Securities Act. However, each of CBI and Professor Lior Rosenberg, and their affiliated entities that hold ordinary shares (consisting of Clal Life Sciences LP and L.R. Research & Development Ltd., respectively) remained entitled to registration rights as of the time of the expiration of the Original Registration Rights Agreement, and we therefore entered into the Registration Rights Agreement with them as a means of extending those rights. . The Registration Rights Agreement provides to the holders of our ordinary shares that are party to the agreement the right to demand that we file a registration statement or request that their ordinary shares be covered by a registration statement that we are otherwise filing. In March 2019, we filed, and the SEC declared effective, on April 22, 2019, a shelf registration statement on Form F-3 that registered the resale of the 11,240,827 shares that were then entitled to registration rights under the Original Registration Rights Agreement. That registration statement remains in effect as of the date of this Annual Report. The registration rights under the Registration Rights Agreement are described in more detail under “ITEM 10.B. Articles of Association” and in Exhibit 2.1 to this Annual Report, which is incorporated by reference in that ITEM 10.B.

In January 2001, we entered into a founders’ and shareholders’ agreement (the “Founders Agreement”), with CBI, Prof. Lior Rosenberg, our Chief Medical Technology Officer, and LR, a private company which is wholly-owned by Prof. Rosenberg. The Founders Agreement was amended in 2006. Pursuant to the Founders Agreement, in exchange for the issuance of ordinary shares and certain rights thereunder and the payment of certain fixed amounts, Prof. Rosenberg granted to us a perpetual, exclusive, non-revocable, royalty-free, sub-licensable, worldwide license for intellectual property relating to debridement using products based on our proteolytic enzyme technology. As of the date hereof, all of the payments under the Founders Agreement were paid by us to Prof. Rosenberg in accordance with the Founders Agreement. The Founders Agreement also provided for anti-dilution, pre-emptive rights, a right of first refusal on the sale of our ordinary shares and bring-along rights, all of which were subsequently terminated.

In January 2018, we entered into a sub-lease agreement (the “Sub-Lease Agreement”), with Clal Life Sciences, L.P. (“CLS”), a subsidiary of CBI, our controlling shareholder, which was amended in February 2019. Pursuant to the Sub-Lease Agreement, we currently sublease approximately 32,300 square feet of laboratory, office and clean room space from CLS and our yearly rent is $0.4 million. The Sub-Lease Agreement is scheduled to expire on October 30, 2025.

We have entered into employment agreements with each of our executive officers, which include standard provisions for a company in our industry regarding non-competition/solicitation, confidentiality of information and assignment of inventions. However, the enforceability of the non-competition provisions may be limited under applicable law. Our executive officers will not receive benefits upon the termination of their respective employment with us, other than payment of salary and benefits (and limited accrual of vacation days) during the required notice period for termination of their employment, which varies for each individual.

Since our inception, we have granted options to purchase our ordinary shares to our directors and executive officers. Such option agreements may contain acceleration provisions upon certain merger, acquisition or change of control transactions. We describe our option plans under “ITEM 6.B. Compensation—2003 Israeli Share Option Plan” and “ITEM 6.B. Compensation—2014 Equity Incentive Plan.” If an executive officer is involuntarily terminated without cause or the executive officer voluntarily terminates his employment for good reason (as defined in the employment agreement), all options will immediately vest. Upon the consummation of a merger or acquisition transaction, an executive officer’s options will be assumed or substituted by the surviving company, if applicable, or, in the compensation committee’s sole discretion, will vest immediately or be amended, modified or terminated. Our compensation committee approved accelerated vesting in the case of a merger or an acquisition transaction for certain of our directors and executive officers with respect to the option agreements dated December 23, 2015, June 22, 2017, January 16, 2018, December 31, 2018, May 2, 2019, April 23, 2020 and March 4, 2021.

Under the 2014 Plan, we have granted RSUs to our executive officers and our chairman of the board. The RSU agreements generally provide for vesting of RSUs over a four-year period of continuous employment or service, with 25% of the RSUs vesting at the lapse of one year following the vesting commencement date, and the remaining 75% of the RSUs vesting in three equal installments, at the lapse of each of the following three years. Absent a specific acceleration provision, if a grantee’s service is terminated for any reason, all RSUs that have not vested will immediately terminate. RSUs that have vested but have not been settled yet for underlying ordinary shares may generally be settled within the three months following the termination of the service of the grantee, other than in the case of termination due to death or disability (in which case the grantee or his/her estate will have one year to settle the vested RSUs for underlying ordinary shares) or termination for cause (in which case all unsettled RSUs will immediately terminate). Upon the consummation of a merger or acquisition transaction, an executive officer’s or the chairman’s RSUs will be assumed or substituted by the surviving company, if applicable, or, in the compensation committee’s sole discretion, will vest immediately or be amended, modified or terminated. The RSUs that we grant may contain acceleration provisions upon certain merger, acquisition or change of control transactions, if approved by our board of directors with respect to a specific grant. The RSUs are generally subject to the further terms of the 2014 Plan, which we describe under “ITEM 6.B. Compensation—2014 Equity Incentive Plan.”

Our articles of association permit us to exculpate, indemnify and insure each of our directors and office holders to the fullest extent permitted by the Israeli Companies Law. Additionally, we have entered into indemnification agreements with each of our directors and executive officers, undertaking to indemnify them to the fullest extent permitted by Israeli law, including with respect to liabilities resulting from a public offering of our shares, to the extent that these liabilities are not covered by insurance. We have also obtained Directors and Officers insurance for each of our executive officers and directors. See “ITEM 6.C. Board Practices—Exculpation, Insurance and Indemnification of Directors and Officers.”

See Item 18. “Financial Statements”.

From time to time, we may be party to litigation or subject to claims incident to the ordinary course of business.

In March 2019, we entered into settlement agreements and mutual general releases with respect to our previously-reported litigation arising under a series of agreements among PolyHeal, Teva and our company that we entered into in 2010 (collectively, the “2010 PolyHeal Agreements”). For a description of the history of the proceedings related to the 2010 PolyHeal Agreements and a dispute related to a collaboration agreement between Teva and our company that we entered into in 2007 (the "2007 Teva Agreement,") please see “ITEM 8. Financial Information— A. Consolidated Statements and Other Financial Information— Legal Proceedings” in our annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2018, filed with the SEC on March 25, 2019 (the “2018 Form 20-F”).

As reported in the 2018 Form 20-F, on March 24, 2019, we entered into an initial settlement with the plaintiffs— certain shareholders of PolyHeal — which settlement was subsequently approved by the Israeli Supreme Court, which settled any and all debts, obligations or liabilities that we and the plaintiffs had to one another in connection with the transactions under the 2010 PolyHeal Agreements. Pursuant to the terms of this settlement agreement, the plaintiffs were to repay a non-material portion of the amount that was ruled in their favor under a November 2017 ruling, and the Israeli Supreme Court was to approve and accept the appeal that was filed by us in December, 2017, cancel the 2017 ruling that was issued by the Israeli District Court against us, and reject the PolyHeal shareholders’ cross-appeal.

Also as reported in the 2018 Form 20-F, on March 24, 2019, we entered into a settlement agreement and mutual general release with Teva, which was contingent upon the Supreme Court’s approval of the settlement with the PolyHeal plaintiffs (which approval was received), which settled any and all debts, obligations or liabilities that each party or any of its controlled affiliates had to the other party or any of its controlled affiliates in connection with certain transactions and collaboration agreements entered into between us and Teva from 2007 to 2012, which had terminated effective as of December 31, 2012 and September 2, 2013, as applicable, and which had related to NexoBrid and PolyHeal, including a milestone payment to PolyHeal and certain additional payments, which were primarily intended to serve as reimbursement for development and manufacturing costs, which we had believed were to be borne by Teva through the effective date of termination of those collaboration agreements in December 2012.

Pursuant to the terms of the Teva settlement agreement, Teva agreed to pay us $4.0 million in cash, and to reduce the contingent consideration that is payable to Teva pursuant to our repurchase of our shares from Teva in 2013, so that we are obligated to pay Teva annual payments at a reduced rate of 15% of its recognized revenues from the sale or license of NexoBrid after January 1, 2019, up to a reduced aggregate amount of $10.2 million. In addition, we also agreed to indemnify Teva and its controlled affiliates from and against claims relating to a certain milestone related to PolyHeal under an agreement associated with our collaboration agreements with Teva, for up to an amount of $10.2 million, if a notice of such claim has been received by us prior to December 31, 2023.

On December 13, 2020, we signed an amendment to the Teva settlement agreement that replaces the revenue-based payment mechanism with a fixed payment schedule.  The aggregate amount paid to Teva of up to $10.2 million and the other terms, including with respect to our indemnification obligations, in the Teva settlement agreement are unchanged.  Out of the $3 million already due to Teva we paid $1 million of the on December 2020 and the balance will be paid in twelve quarterly equal installments during the period commencing on January 1, 2021 and ending on December 31, 2023. In addition, commencing on January 1, 2021, we have agreed to pay Teva an aggregate annual amount of $1 million in four quarterly equal installments, unless we do not recognize any revenues generated from the sale or license of NexoBrid in any such quarter, up to an aggregate amount equal to $7.2 million regardless of the number of quarters required for purposes of the payment of such aggregate amount.

In September 2019, we entered into a series of additional settlement agreements and mutual general releases with certain shareholders of PolyHeal, including Clal Biotechnology Industries Ltd. (CBI), our controlling shareholder, which together constitute the majority of PolyHeal's shareholders.  Those additional settlement agreements settle any and all debts, obligations or liabilities that each party or any of its affiliates had or has to the other party or any of its affiliates, in connection with or arising out of the series of 2010 PolyHeal Agreements. Pursuant to these settlement agreements, we paid an aggregate amount of approximately $2.8 million and received 14,473 shares of PolyHeal.

We have never declared or paid cash dividends to our shareholders and we do not intend to pay cash dividends in the foreseeable future. We intend to reinvest any earnings in developing and expanding our business. Any future determination relating to our dividend policy will be at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend on a number of factors, including future earnings, our financial condition, operating results, contractual restrictions, capital requirements, business prospects, our strategic goals and plans to expand our business, applicable law and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant.

No significant changes have occurred since December 31, 2021, except as otherwise disclosed in this annual report.

Our ordinary shares trade on the Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol “MDWD”.

Our ordinary shares do not have cumulative voting rights for the election of directors. As a result, the holders of a majority of the voting power represented at a meeting of shareholders have the power to elect each of our directors, subject to the special approval requirements for external directors described under “ITEM 6.C. Board Practices—External Directors.” Under our articles of association, our board of directors must consist of at least five and not more than nine directors, including at least two external directors required to be appointed under the Israeli Companies Law. At any time the minimum number of directors (other than the external directors) shall not fall below three. Pursuant to our articles of association, each of our directors, other than the external directors, for whom special election requirements apply under the Israeli Companies Law, will be appointed by a simple majority vote of holders of our voting shares, participating and voting at an annual general meeting of our shareholders. Each director will serve until his or her successor is duly elected and qualified or until his or her earlier death, resignation or removal by a vote of the majority voting power of our shareholders at a general meeting of our shareholders or until his or her office expires by operation of law, in accordance with the Israeli Companies Law. Our articles of association allow our board of directors to appoint directors to fill vacancies on the board of directors to serve until the next annual general meeting of shareholders. External directors are elected for an initial term of three years, may be elected for additional terms of three years each under certain circumstances, and may be removed from office pursuant to the terms of the Israeli Companies Law. Under regulations promulgated under the Israeli Companies Law, Israeli public companies whose shares are traded on certain U.S. stock exchanges, such as the Nasdaq Global Market and that lack a controlling shareholder are exempt from the requirement to appoint external directors. See “ITEM 6.C. Board Practices—Board of Directors and External Directors.”

For a description of the registration rights that are subject to our Registration Rights Agreement, see “ITEM 7.B. Related Party Transactions—Registration Rights Agreement.”

For a description of our contract with the U.S. Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, see “ITEM 4.B. Our Focus—Burn Care—BARDA Contract.”

For a description of our exclusive license and supply agreements with Vericel, see “ITEM 4.B. Business Overview— Marketing, Sales and Distribution— Vericel License and Supply Agreements.”

For a description of our license agreement with Mark Klein, see “ITEM 4.B. Business Overview—Intellectual Property—Klein License Agreement.”

We have entered into an agreement with Challenge Bioproducts Corporation Ltd. (“CBC”), a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the Republic of China, dated January 11, 2001, as amended on February 28, 2010, pursuant to which CBC uses proprietary methods to manufacture bromelain SP and supplies us with this intermediate drug substance in bulk quantities. According to the terms of the agreement, CBC shall not, and shall not permit related companies or a third party to, manufacture, use, supply or sell the raw materials for the use or production of a product directly or indirectly competing with any of our products. Our supply agreement with CBC has no fixed expiration date and can be voluntarily terminated by us, with at least six months’ advance written notice, or by CBC, with at least 24 months’ advance written notice.

In 1998, Israeli currency control regulations were liberalized significantly, so that Israeli residents generally may freely deal in foreign currency and foreign assets, and non-residents may freely deal in Israeli currency and Israeli assets. There are currently no Israeli currency control restrictions on remittances of dividends on the ordinary shares or the proceeds from the sale of the shares provided that all taxes were paid or withheld; however, legislation remains in effect pursuant to which currency controls can be imposed by administrative action at any time.

Non-residents of Israel may freely hold and trade our securities. Neither our articles of association nor the laws of the State of Israel restrict in any way the ownership or voting of ordinary shares by non-residents, except that such restrictions may exist with respect to citizens of countries which are in a state of war with Israel. Israeli residents are allowed to purchase our ordinary shares.

The following description is not intended to constitute a complete analysis of all tax consequences relating to the acquisition, ownership and disposition of our ordinary shares. You should consult your own tax advisor concerning the tax consequences of your particular situation, as well as any tax consequences that may arise under the laws of any state, local, foreign or other taxing jurisdiction.

A non‑Israeli resident (whether an individual or a corporation) who derives capital gains from the sale of shares in an Israeli resident company that were purchased after the company was listed for trading on the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange or on a recognized stock exchange outside of Israel, will generally be exempt from Israeli capital gain tax so long as the shares were not held through a permanent establishment that the non‑resident maintains in Israel (and with respect to shares listed on a recognized stock exchange outside of Israel, so long as the particular capital gain is otherwise subject to the Israeli Income Tax Law (Inflationary Adjustments) 5745‑1985. These provisions dealing with capital gain are not applicable to a person whose gains from selling or otherwise disposing of the shares are deemed to be business income. However, non‑Israeli corporations will not be entitled to the foregoing exemption if Israeli residents (i) have a controlling interest of more than 25% in such non‑Israeli corporation or (ii) are the beneficiaries of, or are entitled to, 25% or more of the revenues or profits of such non‑Israeli corporation, whether directly or indirectly.

Additionally, a sale of shares by a non‑Israeli resident may also be exempt from Israeli capital gains tax under the provisions of an applicable tax treaty. For example, under the Convention Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the State of Israel with respect to Taxes on Income, as amended (the “United States‑Israel Tax Treaty”), the sale, exchange or other disposition of shares by a shareholder who is a United States resident (for purposes of the United States‑Israel Tax Treaty) holding the shares as a capital asset and is entitled to claim the benefits afforded to such a resident by the United States‑Israel Tax Treaty (a “Treaty U.S. Resident”) is generally exempt from Israeli capital gains tax unless: (i) the capital gain arising from such sale, exchange or disposition is attributed to real estate located in Israel; (ii) the capital gain arising from such sale, exchange or disposition is attributed to royalties; (iii) the capital gain arising from the such sale, exchange or disposition can be attributable to a permanent establishment of the shareholder maintained in Israel, under certain terms; (iv) such Treaty U.S. Resident holds, directly or indirectly, shares representing 10% or more of the voting capital of a company during any part of the 12‑month period preceding such sale, exchange or disposition, subject to certain conditions; or (v) such Treaty U.S. Resident is an individual and was present in Israel for a period or periods aggregating to 183 days or more during the relevant taxable year. In each case, the sale, exchange or disposition of our ordinary shares would be subject to such Israeli tax, to the extent applicable; However, under the United States‑Israel Tax Treaty, such Treaty U.S. Resident would be permitted to claim a credit for such taxes against the U.S. federal income tax imposed with respect to such sale, exchange or disposition, subject to the limitations in U.S. laws applicable to foreign tax credits.

In some instances where our shareholders may be liable for Israeli tax on the sale of their ordinary shares, the payment of the consideration may be subject to the withholding of Israeli tax at source. Shareholders may be required to demonstrate that they are exempt from tax on their capital gains in order to avoid withholding at source at the time of sale. Specifically, in transactions involving a sale of all of the shares of an Israeli resident company, in the form of a merger or otherwise, the Israel Tax Authority may require from shareholders who are not liable for Israeli tax to sign declarations in forms specified by this authority or obtain a specific exemption from the Israel Tax Authority to confirm their status as non‑Israeli resident, and, in the absence of such declarations or exemptions, may require the purchaser of the shares to withhold taxes at source.

Non‑Israeli residents (whether individuals or corporations) are generally subject to Israeli income tax on the receipt of dividends paid on our ordinary shares at the rate of 25% unless a relief is provided in a treaty between Israel and a shareholder's country of residence (provided that a certificate from the Israeli Tax Authority allowing for a reduced withholding tax rate is obtained in advance). With respect to a person who is a “substantial shareholder” at the time of receiving the dividend or on any time during the preceding 12 months, the applicable tax rate is 30%. A “substantial shareholder” is generally a person who alone or together with such person’s relative or another person who collaborates with such person on a permanent basis, holds, directly or indirectly, at least 10% of any of the “means of control” of the corporation. “Means of control” generally include the right to vote, receive profits, nominate a director or an executive officer, receive assets upon liquidation, or order someone who holds any of the aforesaid rights how to act, regardless of the source of such right. Such dividends are generally subject to Israeli withholding tax at a rate of 25% so long as the shares are registered with a nominee company (whether or not the recipient is a substantial shareholder), unless relief is provided in a treaty between Israel and the shareholder’s country of residence and provided that a certificate from the Israel Tax Authority allowing for a reduced withholding tax rate is obtained in advance. However, a distribution of dividends to non‑Israeli residents is subject to withholding tax at source at a rate of 15% if the dividend is distributed from income attributed to a Beneficiary Enterprise, unless a reduced tax rate is provided under an applicable tax treaty, and provided that a certificate from the Israel Tax Authority allowing for a reduced withholding tax rate is obtained in advance. For example, under the United States‑Israel Tax Treaty, the maximum rate of tax withheld at source in Israel on dividends paid to a holder of our ordinary shares who is a Treaty U.S. Resident is 25%. However, generally, the maximum rate of withholding tax on dividends, not generated by an Approved Enterprise or Beneficiary Enterprise, that are paid to a U.S. corporation holding 10% or more of the outstanding voting capital throughout the tax year in which the dividend is distributed as well as during the previous tax year, is 12.5%, provided that not more than 25% of the gross income for such preceding year consists of certain types of dividends and interest. Notwithstanding the foregoing, dividends distributed from income attributed to an Approved Enterprise or Beneficiary Enterprise are not entitled to such reduction under the tax treaty but are subject to a withholding tax rate of 15% for such a U.S. corporation, provided that the condition related to our gross income for the previous year (as set forth in the previous sentence) is met. If the dividend is attributable partly to income derived from an Approved Enterprise, Beneficiary Enterprise or Preferred Enterprise, and partly to other sources of income, the withholding rate will be a blended rate reflecting the relative portions of the two types of income. We cannot assure you that we will designate the profits that we may distribute in a way that will reduce shareholders’ tax liability.

A non‑Israeli resident who receives dividends from which tax was withheld, is generally exempt from the obligation to file tax returns in Israel with respect to such income, provided that (i) such income was not derived from a business conducted in Israel by the taxpayer, (ii) the taxpayer has no other taxable sources of income in Israel with respect to which a tax return is required to be filed and (iii) the tax payer is not obligated to pay the excess tax (as further explained below).

Individuals who are subject to tax in Israel are also subject to an additional tax at a rate of 3% on annual income exceeding a certain level, which amount is linked to the annual change in the Israeli consumer price index, including but not limited to, dividends, interest and capital gain. In 2021, the additional tax was at a rate of 3% on annual income exceeding NIS 647,640.

The following is a description of the material U.S. federal income tax consequences of the ownership and disposition of our ordinary shares by a U.S. Holder that holds the ordinary shares as capital assets. This description does not address tax considerations applicable to holders that may be subject to special tax rules, including, without limitation:

Moreover, this description does not address the U.S. federal estate, gift or alternative minimum tax consequences, Medicare consequences, or any state, local or foreign tax consequences, of the ownership and disposition of our ordinary shares.

This summary is based on the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), administrative pronouncements, judicial decisions and final, temporary and proposed Treasury regulations, all as currently in effect and available. These authorities are subject to change or differing interpretation, possibly with retroactive effect. U.S. Holders should consult their tax advisors concerning the U.S. federal, state, local and foreign tax consequences of owning and disposing of our ordinary shares in their particular circumstances.

For purposes of this summary, a “U.S. Holder” is a beneficial owner of our ordinary shares who is, for U.S. federal income tax purposes:

If a partnership (or other entity treated as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes) holds our ordinary shares, the tax treatment of a partner in such partnership generally will depend upon the status of the partner and upon the activities of the partnership. Investors who are partners in a partnership should consult their tax advisors as to the particular U.S. federal income tax consequences of owning and disposing of our ordinary shares in their particular circumstances.

A “Non‑U.S. Holder” is a beneficial owner of our ordinary shares that is neither a U.S. Holder nor a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes.

Unless otherwise indicated, this discussion assumes that the company is not, and will not become, a “passive foreign investment company,” or a PFIC, for U.S. federal income tax purposes. See “ITEM 10.E. Taxation—United States Federal Income Taxation—Passive Foreign Investment Company Considerations” below. Further, this summary does not address the U.S. federal estate and gift, state, local or non‑U.S. tax consequences to U.S. Holders of owning and disposing of our ordinary shares. Investors should consult their own tax advisors regarding the U.S. federal, state and local, as well as non‑U.S. income and other tax consequences of owning and disposing of our ordinary shares in their particular circumstances.

If you are a U.S. Holder, the gross amount of any distribution made to you with respect to our ordinary shares before reduction for any Israeli taxes withheld therefrom, other than certain distributions, if any, of our ordinary shares distributed pro rata to all our shareholders, generally will be includible in your income as dividend income to the extent such distribution is paid out of our current or accumulated earnings and profits as determined under U.S. federal income tax principles. We do not expect to maintain calculations of our earnings and profits under U.S. federal income tax principles. Therefore, if you are a U.S. Holder you should expect that the entire amount of any distribution generally will be taxable as dividend income to you. Non‑corporate U.S. Holders may qualify for the lower rates of taxation with respect to dividends on ordinary shares applicable to long‑term capital gains (i.e., gains from the sale of capital assets held for more than one year), provided that certain conditions are met, including certain holding period requirements and the absence of certain risk reduction transactions. However, such dividends will not be eligible for the dividends received deduction generally allowed to corporate U.S. Holders.

If you are a U.S. Holder, dividends paid to you with respect to our ordinary shares will generally be treated as foreign source income, which may be relevant in calculating your foreign tax credit limitation. Subject to certain conditions and limitations, Israeli tax withheld on dividends may be deducted from your taxable income or credited against your U.S. federal income tax liability. The limitation on foreign taxes eligible for credit is calculated separately with respect to specific classes of income. For this purpose, dividends that we distribute generally should constitute “passive category income.” A foreign tax credit for foreign taxes imposed on distributions may be denied if you do not satisfy certain minimum holding period requirements. The rules relating to the determination of the foreign tax credit are complex, and you should consult your tax advisor to determine whether and to what extent you will be entitled to this credit.

Subject to the discussion below under “—Backup Withholding Tax and Information Reporting Requirements,” if you are a Non‑U.S. Holder, you generally will not be subject to U.S. federal income (or withholding) tax on dividends received by you on your ordinary shares, unless you conduct a trade or business in the United States and such income is effectively connected with that trade or business (or, if required by an applicable income tax treaty, the dividends are attributable to a permanent establishment or fixed base that such holder maintains in the United States).

If you are a U.S. Holder, you generally will recognize gain or loss on the sale, exchange or other taxable disposition of our ordinary shares equal to the difference between the amount realized on such sale, exchange or other taxable disposition and your adjusted tax basis in our ordinary shares, and such gain or loss will be capital gain or loss. The initial tax basis in an ordinary share generally will be equal to the cost of such ordinary share. Except with respect to foreign currency gain or loss, if you are a non‑corporate U.S. Holder, capital gain from the sale, exchange or other taxable disposition of ordinary shares is generally eligible for a preferential rate of taxation applicable to capital gains, if your holding period for such ordinary shares exceeds one year (i.e., such gain is long‑term capital gain). The deductibility of capital losses for U.S. federal income tax purposes is subject to limitations under the Code. Any such gain or loss that a U.S. Holder recognizes generally will be treated as U.S. source income or loss for foreign tax credit limitation purposes.

Subject to the discussion below under “—Backup Withholding Tax and Information Reporting Requirements,” if you are a Non‑U.S. Holder, you generally will not be subject to U.S. federal income or withholding tax on any gain realized on the sale or exchange of such ordinary shares unless:

If we were to be classified as a “passive foreign investment company,” or “PFIC,” in any taxable year, a U.S. Holder would be subject to special rules generally intended to reduce or eliminate any benefits from the deferral of U.S. federal income tax that a U.S. Holder could derive from investing in a non‑U.S. company that does not distribute all of its earnings on a current basis.

A non‑U.S. corporation will be classified as a PFIC for federal income tax purposes in any taxable year in which, after applying certain look‑through rules with respect to the income and assets of subsidiaries, either:

Passive income for this purpose generally includes dividends, interest, royalties, rents, gains from commodities and securities transactions, the excess of gains over losses from the disposition of assets which produce passive income, and includes amounts derived by reason of the temporary investment of funds raised in offerings of our ordinary shares. If a non‑U.S. corporation owns at least 25% by value of the stock of another corporation, the non‑U.S. corporation is treated for purposes of the PFIC tests as owning its proportionate share of the assets of the other corporation and as receiving directly its proportionate share of the other corporation’s income. If we are classified as a PFIC in any year with respect to which a U.S. Holder owns our ordinary shares, we will continue to be treated as a PFIC with respect to such U.S. Holder in all succeeding years during which the U.S. Holder owns our ordinary shares unless we cease to be a PFIC and the U.S. holder has made a “deemed sale” election under the PFIC rules.

Based on our current estimates of our gross income and the estimated fair market value of our gross assets and the nature of our business, we do not believe we were classified as a PFIC for the taxable year ending December 31, 2021. However, we must determine our PFIC status annually based on tests which are factual in nature, and our status in future years will depend on our income, assets and activities in those years. Further, because the value of our gross assets is likely to be determined in large part by reference to our market capitalization, a decline in the value of our ordinary shares or an increase in the value of our passive assets (including cash and short term investments) may result in our becoming a PFIC. There can be no assurance that we will not be considered a PFIC for any taxable year. If we were a PFIC and you are a U.S. Holder, then unless you make one of the elections described below, a special tax regime will apply to both (a) any “excess distribution” by us to you (generally, your ratable portion of distributions in any year which are greater than 125% of the average annual distribution received by you in the shorter of the three preceding years or your holding period for our ordinary shares) and (b) any gain realized on the sale or other disposition of the ordinary shares. Under this regime, any excess distribution and realized gain will be treated as ordinary income and will be subject to tax as if (a) the excess distribution or gain had been realized  ratably over your holding period, (b) the amount deemed realized in each year had been subject to tax in each year of that holding period at the highest marginal rate for such year (other than income allocated to the current period or any taxable period before we became a PFIC, which would be subject to tax at the U.S. Holder’s regular ordinary income rate for the current year and would not be subject to the interest charge discussed below) and (c) the interest charge generally applicable to underpayments of tax had been imposed on the taxes deemed to have been payable in those years. In addition, dividend distributions made to you will not qualify for the lower rates of taxation applicable to long‑term capital gains discussed above under “Distributions.” Certain elections may be available that would result in an alternative treatment (such as mark‑to‑market treatment) of our ordinary shares.

If a U.S. Holder makes a valid mark‑to‑market election for the first tax year in which such U.S. Holder holds (or is deemed to hold) ordinary shares in a corporation and for which such corporation is determined to be a PFIC, the U.S. Holder generally will recognize as ordinary income any excess of the fair market value of the ordinary shares at the end of each taxable year over their adjusted tax basis, and will recognize an ordinary loss in respect of any excess of the adjusted tax basis of the ordinary shares over their fair market value at the end of the taxable year (but only to the extent of the net amount of income previously included as a result of the mark‑to‑market election). If a U.S. Holder makes the election, the U.S. Holder’s tax basis in the ordinary shares will be adjusted to reflect these income or loss amounts. Any gain recognized on the sale or other disposition of ordinary shares in a year when we are a PFIC will be treated as ordinary income and any loss will be treated as an ordinary loss (but only to the extent of the net amount of income previously included as a result of the mark‑to‑market election). The mark‑to‑market election is available only if we are a PFIC and our ordinary shares are “regularly traded” on a “qualified exchange.” Our ordinary shares will be treated as “regularly traded” in any calendar year in which more than a de minimis quantity of the ordinary shares, are traded on a qualified exchange on at least 15 days during each calendar quarter. Nasdaq is a qualified exchange for this purpose and, consequently, if the ordinary shares are regularly traded, the mark‑to‑market election will be available to a U.S. Holder.

If we are a PFIC, the general tax treatment for U.S. Holders described in this section would apply to indirect distributions and gains deemed to be realized by U.S. Holders in respect of any entity in which we hold equity that is also a PFIC (a "lower tier PFIC"). Because a mark‑to‑market election generally would not be available with respect to any lower‑tier PFICs, a U.S. Holder may continue to be subject to the PFIC rules with respect to such holder’s indirect interest in any investments held by us that are treated as an equity interest in such lower-tiers PFICs.

We do not intend to provide the information necessary for U.S. Holders to make qualified electing fund elections if we are classified as a PFIC. U.S. Holders should consult their tax advisors to determine whether any of these elections would be available and if so, what the consequences of the alternative treatments would be in their particular circumstances.

If a U.S. Holder owns ordinary shares during any year in which we are a PFIC, the U.S. Holder generally will be required to file an IRS Form 8621 (Information Return by a Shareholder of a Passive Foreign Investment Company or Qualified Electing Fund) or successor form with respect to the company, generally with the U.S. Holder’s federal income tax return for that year. If the company was a PFIC for a given taxable year, then you should consult your tax advisor concerning your annual filing requirements.

U.S. Holders should consult their tax advisors regarding whether we are a PFIC and the potential application of the PFIC rules.

U.S. backup withholding tax and information reporting requirements may apply to certain payments to certain holders of stock. Information reporting generally will apply to payments of dividends on, and to proceeds from the sale, exchange or redemption of, our ordinary shares made within the United States, or by a United States payor or United States middleman, to a holder of our ordinary shares, other than an exempt recipient (including a payee that is not a United States person that provides an appropriate certification and certain other persons). Payments made (and sales or other dispositions effected at an office) outside the U.S. will be subject to information reporting in limited circumstances. A payor will be required to withhold backup withholding tax from any payments of dividends on, or the proceeds from the sale or redemption of, ordinary shares within the United States, or by a United States payor or United States middleman, to a holder, other than an exempt recipient, if such holder fails to furnish its correct taxpayer identification number or otherwise fails to comply with, or establish an exemption from, such backup withholding tax requirements, or to report dividends required to be shown on the holder’s U.S. federal income tax returns. Back up withholding is not an additional tax. Any amounts withheld under the backup withholding rules will be allowed as a credit against the beneficial owner’s U.S. federal income tax liability, if any, and any excess amounts withheld under the backup withholding rules may be refunded, provided that the required information is timely furnished to the IRS.

Certain U.S. Holders who are individuals and certain entities may be required to report information relating to an interest in our ordinary shares, subject to certain exceptions (including an exception for shares held in accounts maintained by certain financial institutions) by filing IRS Form 8938 (Statement of Specified Foreign Financial Assets) with their federal income tax return. U.S. Holders are urged to consult their tax advisors regarding their information reporting obligations, if any, with respect to their ownership and disposition of our ordinary shares.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

We are exposed to a variety of risks, including foreign currency exchange fluctuations, changes in interest rates and inflation. We regularly assess currency, interest rate and inflation risks to minimize any adverse effects on our business as a result of those factors.

The U.S. dollar is our functional and reporting currency. A significant portion of our operating expenses are denominated in Israeli shekels, accounting for approximately 40%, 44% and 45% of our operating expenses in the years ended December 31, 2019, 2020 and 2021, respectively. We also have expenses in other non‑dollar currencies, in particular the Euro, and for the next few years, we expect that a substantial portion of our revenues will be denominated in U.S dollar. A devaluation of the shekel in relation to the U.S. dollar has the effect of reducing the U.S. dollar amount of our expenses or payables that are payable in shekels, unless those expenses or payables are linked to the U.S. dollar. Conversely, any increase in the value of the shekel in relation to the U.S. dollar has the effect of increasing the U.S. dollar value of our unlinked shekel expenses, which would have a negative impact on our profit margins.

Because exchange rates between the U.S. dollar and both the shekel and the Euro (as well as between the U.S. dollar and other currencies) fluctuate continuously, such fluctuations have an impact on our results and period‑to‑period comparisons of our results. The effects of foreign currency re‑measurements are reported in our consolidated financial statements of operations.

The following table presents information about the changes in the exchange rates of the shekel against the U.S. dollar and changes in the exchange rates of the Euro against the U.S. dollar:

A 10% increase (decrease) in the value of the NIS and Euro against the U.S. dollar would have increased (decreased) our net profit by (loss) approximately $0.74 million for the year ended December 31, 2021.

As we are marketing and selling NexoBrid in Europe and conducting clinical trials of outside the United States, we will continue to monitor exposure to currency fluctuations. We do not currently engage in currency hedging activities in order to reduce this currency exposure, but we may begin to do so in the future. Instruments that may be used to hedge future risks may include foreign currency forward and swap contracts. These instruments may be used to selectively manage risks, but there can be no assurance that we will be fully protected against material foreign currency fluctuations.

We do not believe that we have material exposure to interest rate risk due to the fact that we have no long‑term debt.

We do not believe that we have any material exposure to inflationary risks. We do not believe that the rate of inflation in Israel has had a material impact on our business to date. However, our costs in Israel will increase if inflation in Israel exceeds the devaluation of the shekel against the U.S. dollar (to the extent that it devalues at all) or if the timing of such devaluation lags behind inflation in Israel.

Not applicable.

None.

None.

Our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as such term is defined in Rules 13a‑15(e) and 15d‑15(e) under the Exchange Act) as of December 31, 2021. Based on such evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that, as of December 31, 2021, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective.

Our management, under the supervision of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting as defined in Rules 13a‑15(f) and 15d‑15(f) under the Exchange Act.

Our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2021. In making this assessment, our management used the criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Our management has concluded, based on its assessment, that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2021.

There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting (as such term is defined in Rules 13a‑15(f) and 15d‑15(f) under the Exchange Act) that occurred during the period covered by this annual report that have materially affected, or that are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

Our board of directors has determined that Sharon Kochan qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert,” as defined under the U.S. federal securities laws and has the requisite financial experience defined by the Nasdaq Marketplace Rules. In addition, Sharon Kochan is independent as such term is defined in Rule 10A‑3(b)(1) under the Exchange Act and under the listing standards of the Nasdaq Global Market.

We have adopted a code of business conduct and ethics applicable to our executive officers, directors and all other employees. A copy of the code is delivered to every employee of MediWound Ltd. and its subsidiaries and is available to our investors and others on our website http://ir.mediwound.com/ or by contacting our investor relations department. Information contained on, or that can be accessed through, our website does not constitute a part of this annual report and is not incorporated by reference herein. Any waivers of this code for executive officers or directors will be disclosed through the filing of a Form 6‑K or on our website. We granted no waivers under our code of ethics in 2021.

We paid the following fees for professional services rendered by Kost Forer Gabbay & Kasierer, a member of Ernst & Young Global, who was our independent registered public accounting firm until the April 28, 2021, and by Somekh Chaikin, a member firm of KPMG International Haifa, Israel, Auditor firm ID: 1057, who became our independent registered public accounting firm on June 15, 2021 for the year ended December 31, 2021:

“Audit fees” are the aggregate fees paid for the audit of our annual financial statements for the year 2021. This category also includes services that generally the independent accountant provides, such as consents and assistance with and review of documents filed with the SEC.

“Audit‑related fees” are the aggregate fees paid for assurance and related services that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit and are not reported under audit fees. These fees primarily include accounting consultations regarding the accounting treatment of matters that occur in the regular course of business, implications of new accounting pronouncements and other accounting issues that occur from time to time.

“Tax fees” include fees for professional services rendered by our independent registered public accounting firm for tax compliance, transfer pricing and tax advice on actual or contemplated transactions.

The Audit Committee pre‑approves all audit and non‑audit services provided by the independent registered public accounting firm.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

 The information required by this Item 16F was previously reported in our report of foreign private issuer on Form 6‑K (File No. 001‑36349) filed with the SEC on March 2, 2022.