Enlivex Therapeutics (ENLV) 20-F2023 FY Annual report (foreign)

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 20-F

(Mark One)

☐ REGISTRATION STATEMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) OR (g) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

OR

☒ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2023

OR

☐ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

OR

☐ SHELL COMPANY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Date of event requiring this shell company report _____

For the transition period from ____ to ____

Commission file number 001-36578

Enlivex Therapeutics Ltd.

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

State of Israel

(Jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)

14 Einstein Street, Ness Ziona, Israel 7403618

(Address of principal executive offices)

Mr. Oren Hershkovitz

Tel: +972.2.6208072
Email: Oren@enlivexpharm.com
Facsimile: +972.2.6208070

14 Einstein Street, Ness Ziona, Israel 7403618

(Name, Telephone, E-mail and/or Facsimile number and Address of Company Contact Person)

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

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act: None

Indicate the number of outstanding shares of each of the issuer’s classes of capital or common stock as of the close of the period covered by the annual report.

18,598,555 ordinary shares, par value NIS 0.40 per share, as of December 31, 2023

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.

Yes ☐     No ☒

If this report is an annual or transition report, indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Yes ☐     No ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

Yes ☒     No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files).

Yes ☒     No ☐

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

If an emerging growth company that prepares its financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards^† provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

† The term “new or revised financial accounting standard” refers to any update issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board to its Accounting Standards Codification after April 5, 2012.

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

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

Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant’s executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to §240.1D-1(b). ☐

Indicate by check mark which basis of accounting the registrant has used to prepare the financial statements included in this filing:

If “Other” has been checked in response to the previous question, indicate by check mark which financial statement item the registrant has elected to follow.

Item 17 ☐     Item 18 ☐

If this is an annual report, indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act)

Yes ☐     No ☒

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

Business Description of Enlivex

Enlivex Therapeutics Ltd., a company organized under the laws of the State of Israel (including its consolidated subsidiaries, “Enlivex”, “we”, “us”, “our” or the “Company”), is a clinical-stage macrophage reprogramming immunotherapy company, developing Allocetra^TM, a universal, off-the-shelf cell therapy designed to reprogram macrophages into their homeostatic state. Resetting non-homeostatic macrophages into their homeostatic state is critical for immune system rebalancing and resolution of debilitating and life-threatening conditions. Non-homeostatic macrophages contribute significantly to the severity of diseases. By restoring macrophage homeostasis, Allocetra™ has the potential to provide a novel immunotherapeutic mechanism of action for debilitating and life-threatening clinical indications that are defined as “unmet medical needs,” as a stand-alone therapy or in combination with leading therapeutic agents.

Macrophages are tissue-resident or infiltrating immune cells critical for innate immunity, normal tissue development, and repair of damaged tissue. Macrophages’ function is a result of their original designation, their local micro-environment, and the type of metabolites, substances, or pathogens to which they are exposed. Reprogrammed out of their homeostatic state, macrophages contribute to the pathophysiology of multiple inflammatory diseases, including sepsis, osteoarthritis and other inflammatory disorders.

We believe the Company’s primary innovative immunotherapy, Allocetra^TM, represents a paradigm shift in macrophage reprogramming, moving from targeting a specific subset of macrophages or a specific pathway affecting macrophages activity, to a fundamental view of macrophage homeostasis. Restoring macrophage homeostasis may induce the immune system to rebalance itself to normal levels of operation, thereby promoting disease resolution.

The Company is focused on two clinical program verticals as its main inflammatory and autoimmune indications: sepsis and osteoarthritis (the “Indications”). Additionally, the Company is seeking external collaborations or out-licensing opportunities for the development of Allocetra™ as a next-generation solid cancer immunotherapy. The Company believes that negatively-reprogrammed macrophages may be key contributors to disease severity across the Indications, and effective reprogramming of these negative-reprogrammed macrophages into their respective homeostatic states may facilitate disease resolution for the Indications, some of which are considered “unmet medical needs.” All planned and expected timelines for execution of the clinical trials in the Indications are subject to certain risks and uncertainties. For further discussion of risks and uncertainties related to our clinical trial in the Indications please see Item 3.D. “Risk Factors” below.

Strategic Reprioritization Plan

In September 2023, we announced a strategic reprioritization plan, pursuant to which we determined to increase our existing focus on inflammatory and autoimmune indications. As part of the strategic reprioritization plan, in addition to the ongoing Phase II trial of Allocetra^TM in patients with sepsis, we initiated a clinical program in osteoarthritis, which is a degenerative disease with low grade inflammation and an indication with a substantial unmet medical need that potentially represents a multibillion commercial market.

Pursuant to the strategic reprioritization plan, and in light of the new guidelines and regulatory initiatives set by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (the “FDA”) for drug development in oncology, which may result in longer clinical development cycles as foundations for regulatory approvals, the Company ceased the internal clinical development of its various oncology indications and plans to seek external collaborations or out-licensing opportunities for the development of Allocetra™ as a next-generation solid cancer immunotherapy.

As a result of the Company’s reprioritization of its clinical indications and focus on the inflammatory and auto-immune verticals, the Company reduced its workforce by approximately 50%. The workforce reduction and the savings associated with the reclassification of the oncology indications as candidates for external collaborations or out-licensing opportunities in lieu of internal development are expected to result in a substantial extension of the Company’s cash runway through the end of 2025. The revised, extended cash runway is expected to support the timeline for the topline data readouts of the end-stage knee osteoarthritis Phase I/II trial as well as the randomized, controlled Phase II clinical trial in osteoarthritis.

Sepsis: Topline Results of Phase II Trial Evaluating Allocetra™ in Patients with Sepsis

In 2021, we initiated a placebo-controlled, randomized, dose-finding, multi-center, Phase II trial evaluating liquid Allocetra™ in patients with pneumonia-associated sepsis. During 2022, we amended the protocol of this clinical trial to treat newly recruited patients with frozen formulation Allocetra™ and expand the study population to include patients whose septic condition stemmed from biliary, urinary tract or peritoneal infections. An additional amendment to the study protocol was filed in the second quarter of 2023, to include an increase in the patients’ sequential organ failure assessment (“SOFA”) score range, effectively allowing recruitment of patients with higher levels of sepsis severity, and a change to two cohorts (treatment and placebo) in lieu of the four-cohort structure previously contemplated. The first patient was dosed under the amended protocol during the second quarter of 2023, and, in December 2023, we completed enrollment of all 120 patients in the trial.

In April 2024, we announced the 28-day topline data from the Phase II trial evaluating Allocetra^TM in patients with sepsis. Stand-alone analysis¹ of the Allocetra^TM-treated patients, of which 78% had septic shock and 58% had invasive ventilation at screening, demonstrated substantial reductions in SOFA scores and a 65% reduction in overall mortality rate as compared with expected mortality based on real-world data and recent sizeable clinical studies in sepsis. By day 28, the analysis showed 90% reductions of SOFA scores for sepsis patients whose infection source was urinary tract, 68% for patients whose infection source was community-acquired pneumonia, and 36% for patients whose infection source was an internal abdominal infection. Relative analysis demonstrates a potential indication of effect of Allocetra™, as compared with placebo, in the high-risk severe sepsis patient population originating from urinary tract infections (“High-Risk UTI”). Up to an estimated 31% of sepsis cases start as urinary tract infections, representing up to 9.8 million cases and up to 1.6 million deaths annually worldwide (G. Bonkat et. al. 2018), which represents a substantial potential market opportunity for Allocetra™. We intend to consider a potential follow-on, randomized, controlled study of a solely High-Risk UTI sepsis population upon reviewing the totality of the data.

The study was designed for patients to be randomized with equal degree of SOFA scores across treatment and placebo groups. The randomization resulted in the Allocetra™-treated cohorts having 20% higher frequency of septic shock and 35% higher frequency of invasive ventilation prior to treatment, as compared with the control group. Both of these patient attributes are associated with a significantly higher degree of difficulty of treatment and higher mortality rates. These imbalances made it challenging to deduce the relative effect in other patient subgroups.

Finally, stand-alone and placebo-compared analysis across all sepsis patient subgroups and risk categories demonstrated acceptable safety and tolerability profile of Allocetra™ IV infusions.

For additional information on the topline results of our Phase II sepsis trial, see Item 4.B. “Information on the Company—Business Overview.”

Our Phase II sepsis trial is supported by previously reported positive results from a Phase Ib trial that demonstrated Allocetra^TM’s favorable safety profile and showed vastly improved clinical outcomes, including SOFA scores, duration of hospitalization, and mortality in Allocetra-treated sepsis patients compared to a group of matched historical controls who received standard-of-care therapy. Sepsis is a life-threatening disease with no therapies approved by the FDA and a high unmet medical need. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (the “CDC”), each year, at least 1.7 million adults in the United States develop sepsis, with approximately 270,000 dying of the disease.

Knee Osteoarthritis: First End-Stage Patient Dosed and Initiation of Randomized Controlled Phase I/II Study Clinical Trials

During 2023, we reprioritized our clinical program and initiated a clinical program in osteoarthritis, which is the most common chronic degenerative joint disease characterized by cartilage degradation, low grade inflammation, pain and disability. Osteoarthritis is an indication with a substantial unmet medical need that potentially represents a multibillion commercial market.

In the third quarter of 2023, we announced the dosing of the first patient with a direct injection of Allocetra^TM to the knee in a Phase I/II investigator-initiated clinical trial evaluating the safety and initial efficacy of Allocetra^TM in end-stage knee osteoarthritis patients indicated for knee replacement surgery. In January 2024, following our receipt of regulatory approval from the Israeli Ministry of Health (“IMOH”), we initiated a Company-sponsored multi-country, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled Phase I/II trial to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of Allocetra™ following injections into the target knee joint of up to 160 moderately to severely symptomatic osteoarthritis patients. In April 2024, we announced that the Danish Medicines Agency authorized the expansion of this trial into Denmark, as well as the dosing of the first two patients in the trial. This Phase I/II multi-center trial is composed of two stages. The first stage is a safety run-in, open-label dose escalation phase to characterize the safety and tolerability of Allocetra™ injections to the target knee in order to identify the dose and injection regimen for the second, randomized stage. The second stage is a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled stage, which we expect to initiate following the completion of the safety run-in stage and confirmation by the safety and tolerability independent Data and Safety Monitoring Board. In addition to evaluating safety, the blinded randomized stage is statistically-powered to assess the efficacy of Allocetra™ injections into the knee. We expect that the primary measurements will evaluate joint-pain and joint-function compared to placebo at three months, six months and 12 months. We are targeting to receive the topline readout from the randomized stage of the study by the third quarter of 2025.

The initiation of the clinical program in osteoarthritis followed preclinical evidence of the potential applicability of Allocetra’s^TM mechanism of action to resolve chronic low-grade inflammation of joints afflicted with osteoarthritis, as well as a substantial recovery in a case of a 70-year old patient who suffered for many years from vanishing bone disease (Gorham-Stout syndrome). Despite exhaustive therapeutic attempts, the patient’s disease remained refractory to treatment, requiring extended hospitalization for a duration of nine months prior to compassionate treatment with Allocetra^TM to the shoulder joint. Following five intra-articular Allocetra^TM injections, substantial improvement was documented in multiple clinical parameters, and the patient was successfully discharged from the hospital. At a two-year follow-up, the improvement in the afflicted shoulder was maintained, and no subsequent hospital re-admissions were required.

Manufacturing Plant Update

In September 2021, we entered into a lease agreement (the “Lease Agreement”) for a 2,500 square meter property in Yavne, Israel to construct a new 1,600 square meter facility for the manufacture of Allocetra™, which was completed in the fourth quarter of 2022. As part of our strategic reprioritization plan, we determined to sell such leased manufacturing facility, together with the equipment installed by us therein (the “Equipment”), and assign the Lease Agreement.

On March 31, 2024, we entered into an agreement (the “Yavne Facility Sale Agreement”) with BioHarvest Ltd., an Israeli company (the “purchaser”), pursuant to which the purchaser agreed to acquire the Equipment and assume all of our obligations under the Lease Agreement, effective as of April 1, 2024, for an aggregate purchase price (the “Purchase Price”) payable to the Company of 13.0 million New Israeli Shekels (“NIS”) (approximately $3.5 million). The Purchase Price is payable in installments, consisting of an initial payment of NIS 4.0 million (approximately $1.08 million), which was paid on April 2, 2024, and 24 equal monthly installment payments of NIS 375,000 (approximately $102,000), commencing on April 1, 2024. Pursuant to the Yavne Facility Sale Agreement, title to the Equipment will transfer to the purchaser only upon full payment of the total Purchase Price, but risk of loss to the Equipment passed to the purchaser on April 1, 2024. Subject to certain conditions, the purchaser may, in its sole discretion, prior to October 1, 2025, prepay (i) all of the remaining outstanding Purchase Price at a 4% discount, or (ii) a portion of the remaining outstanding Purchase Price, in an amount of not less than NIS 4.0 million (approximately $1.08 million), at a 2% discount, in which case, the Purchase Price remaining outstanding thereafter shall continue to be paid in monthly instalments of NIS 375,000 each (approximately $102,000).

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 20-F contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 and other U.S. Federal securities laws. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to:

In some cases, forward-looking statements are identified by terminology such as “may,” “will,” “could,” “should,” “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “intends,” “estimates,” “predicts,” “hope,” “targets,” “potential,” “goal” or “continue” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. Such forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results or performance to differ materially from those suggested in such forward-looking statements. These statements are current only as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 20-F and are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause our actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements to be materially different from those suggested in the forward-looking statements. In addition, historic results of scientific research and clinical and preclinical trials do not guarantee that the conclusions of future research or trials would not suggest different conclusions or that historic results referred to in this Annual Report on Form 20-F would not be interpreted differently in light of additional research, clinical and preclinical trials results. The forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report on Form 20-F are subject to risks and uncertainties, including those discussed in Item 3.D. “Risk Factors” and in our other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 20-F. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee future results, levels of activity, performance, or achievements. Except as required by law, we do not intend to (and expressly disclaim any such obligation to) update or revise any of the forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

RISK FACTOR SUMMARY

Our business is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, including those described in Item 3.D. “Risk Factors.” These risks include, but are not limited to the following:

PART ONE

ITEM 1. IDENTITY OF DIRECTORS, SENIOR MANAGEMENT AND ADVISERS

Not applicable.

ITEM 2. OFFER STATISTICS AND EXPECTED TIMETABLE 

Not applicable.

ITEM 3. KEY INFORMATION 

3.A. [Reserved]

3.B. Capitalization and Indebtedness

Not applicable.

3.C. Reasons for the Offer and Use of Proceeds

Not applicable.

3.D. Risk Factors

Investing in our ordinary shares involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the risks described below before investing in our ordinary shares.

There are a number of risks and uncertainties that could affect our business and cause our actual results to differ from past performance or expected results. We consider the following risks and uncertainties to be those material to our business. If any of these risks actually occur, our business, financial condition and results of operations could suffer, and the trading price of our ordinary shares could decline. We urge investors to consider carefully the risk factors described below, together with the other information contained in this Annual Report on Form 20-F, in evaluating any investment in our ordinary shares.

Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Capital Requirements

We are a clinical-stage macrophage reprogramming immunotherapy company with a history of operating losses. We expect to incur additional losses in the future and may never be profitable.

We are a clinical-stage macrophage reprogramming immunotherapy company with a limited operating history and no currently approved products. To date, we have focused almost exclusively on developing our related product candidate, Allocetra™, a universal, off-the-shelf cell therapy designed to reprogram macrophages into their homeostatic stage, currently focusing on treatment of the Indications. We have funded our operations to date primarily through proceeds from private placements of ordinary shares and convertible debt. We have no saleable products and have not generated any revenue from product sales. We have incurred losses in each year since our inception in 2005. Our loss attributable to holders of our ordinary shares for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022 was $29 million and $31 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2023, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $112.1 million. Substantially all of our operating losses resulted from costs incurred in connection with our development program and from general and administrative costs.

We expect to continue to incur significant research and development expenses in the future as we continue the advancement of our clinical studies and as we potentially pursue additional indications. We may also incur expenses in connection with third-party studies and trials involving our product candidates or other intellectual property. In addition, if we obtain marketing approval for any of our product candidates, we will likely initially incur significant outsourced sales, marketing and manufacturing expenses, as well as continued research and development expenses. As a result, we expect to continue to incur significant and increasing operating losses for the foreseeable future. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with developing cell immunotherapy products, we are unable to predict the extent of any future losses or when we will become profitable, if at all.

We have not generated any revenue from Allocetra™ or any other product candidate, and we may never be profitable.

Our ability to become profitable depends upon our ability to generate revenue in excess of our expenses. We have not generated any revenue from our development of Allocetra™, or any other product candidate. We do not know when, or if, we will generate any revenue. We do not expect to generate revenue unless and until we obtain regulatory and marketing approval of, and commercialize, Allocetra™ or any other product candidate. We will continue to incur research and development and general and administrative expenses related to our operations. We expect to continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future, and such losses will likely increase as we:

We may out-license our ability to generate revenue from our product candidates, depending on a number of factors, including our ability to:

Even if Allocetra™, our lead product candidate, which is currently being developed for the Indications, is approved for commercial sale for any indication, it may not gain market acceptance or achieve commercial success. In addition, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercialization. We may not achieve profitability soon after generating product revenue, if ever. If we are unable to generate product revenue, we will not become profitable and would be unable to continue operations without additional funding.

We have not yet commercialized any products and we may never become profitable.

We have not yet commercialized any products, and we may never do so. We do not know when or if we will complete any of our product development efforts, obtain regulatory approval for any product candidates or successfully commercialize any approved products. Even if we are successful in developing products that are approved for marketing, we will not be successful unless these products gain market acceptance for appropriate indications. The degree of market acceptance of any of our planned future products will depend on a number of factors, including, but not limited to:

Physicians, patients, third-party payors or the medical community in general may be unwilling to accept, utilize or recommend coverage of, and in the case of third-party payors, cover any of our planned future products. As a result, we are unable to predict the extent of future losses or the time required to achieve profitability, if at all. Even if we successfully develop one or more products, we may not become profitable.

Our limited operating history makes it difficult to evaluate our business and prospects.

Although we have been in existence since 2005, we have a limited operating history, and our operations to date have been limited primarily to research and development, clinical trials, raising capital and recruiting scientific and management personnel. Therefore, it is difficult to evaluate our business and prospects. We have not yet commercialized or obtained regulatory approval for any product candidate. Consequently, any predictions about our future performance may not be accurate, and you may not be able to fully assess our ability to complete development or commercialize our product candidates, or any future product candidates, obtain regulatory approvals or achieve market acceptance or favorable pricing for our product candidates or any future product candidates.

We will need substantial additional capital in the future. If additional capital is not available, we will have to delay, reduce or cease operations.

We will need to raise substantial additional capital to fund our operations and to develop and commercialize our product candidates, particularly Allocetra™. Our future capital requirements may be substantial and will depend on many factors, including, but not limited to:

Based on our current operating plan, we anticipate that our existing resources will be sufficient to maintain our currently planned operations, including our continued product development, through the end of 2025. We will require significant additional funds to initiate and complete the FDA and the European Medicines Agency (“EMA”) approval process. However, changing circumstances may cause us to consume capital significantly faster than we currently anticipate, including, without limitation, regulatory requests by the FDA or EMA, changes in our development strategy, delays in or an inability to execute our development plans, unsuccessful preclinical or clinical studies and losing our “Small and Medium Enterprise” status at the EMA, which entitles us to significant fee reductions. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with the development and commercialization of our product candidates, we are unable to estimate the amount of increased capital and operating expenditures associated with our anticipated clinical trials and general operations. We have no committed external sources of funds. Additional financing may not be available when we need it or on terms that are favorable to us. If adequate funds are not available to us on a timely basis, or at all, we may be required to terminate or delay planned clinical trials or other development activities for our product candidates, which would materially and adversely affect our liquidity and results of operations.

Raising additional financing may be costly or difficult to obtain, may dilute current shareholders’ ownership interests and may require that we relinquish our rights to certain of our technologies, products or marketing territories.

Any debt or equity financing that we may need may not be available on terms favorable to us, or at all. If we obtain funding through a strategic collaboration or licensing arrangement, we may be required to relinquish our rights to certain of our technologies, products or marketing territories. If we are unable to obtain required additional capital, we may have to curtail our growth plans or cut back on existing business, and we may not be able to continue operating.

We may incur substantial costs in pursuing future financing, including investment banking fees, legal fees, accounting fees, securities law compliance fees, printing and distribution expenses and other costs. We may also be required to recognize non-cash expenses in connection with certain securities we issue, such as convertible notes and warrants, which may adversely impact our financial condition and results of operations.

Any additional capital raised through the sale of equity or equity-linked securities may dilute our current shareholders’ ownership in us and could also result in a decrease in the market price of our ordinary shares. The terms of the securities issued by us in future capital transactions may be more favorable to new investors and may include the issuance of warrants or other derivative securities, which may have a further dilutive effect.

We are unable to estimate our long-term capital requirements due to uncertainties associated with the development and commercialization of our product candidates. If we fail to obtain necessary funds for our operations, we will be unable to develop and commercialize any of our product candidates.

We expect our long-term capital requirements to depend on many potential factors, including, among others:

If we are unable to obtain the funds necessary for our operations, we will be unable to develop and commercialize any of our product candidates, or any future product candidates, which would materially and adversely affect our business, liquidity and results of operations.

Due to our recurring operating losses, our ability to continue to operate as a going concern is dependent on additional financial support.

We devote substantially all of our efforts toward research and development activities. In the course of such activities, we have sustained operating losses and expect such losses to continue for the foreseeable future. We have no current source of revenue to sustain our present activities, and we do not expect to generate revenue until, and unless, the FDA or other regulatory authorities approve one of our product candidates and we successfully commercialize (including out-licensing) such product candidate. Accordingly, our ability to continue operating will require us to obtain additional financing to fund our operations. According to our estimates, if we are not successful in obtaining additional capital resources, there is a substantial doubt that we will be able to continue our activities beyond the end of 2025. The perception of our inability to continue as a going concern may make it more difficult for us to obtain financing for the continuation of our operations and could result in the loss of confidence by investors, suppliers and employees.

Our business, operating results and growth may be adversely affected by current or future unfavorable economic and market conditions due to geopolitical tensions and political, economic and military instability.

Our business depends on the economic health of the global economies. U.S. and global markets have recently experienced volatility and disruption, including as a result of the escalation of geopolitical tensions following the start of the war between Russia and Ukraine in February 2022 and the war between Israel and Hamas in October 2023. If the conditions in the global economies remain uncertain or continue to be volatile, or if they deteriorate, including as a result of the impact of military conflict, such as the war between Russia and Ukraine and Israel and Hamas, terrorism or other geopolitical events, such as political instability in Israel, our business, operating results and financial condition may be materially adversely affected. Economic weakness, inflation and increases in interest rates, limited availability of credit, liquidity shortages and constrained capital spending have at times in the past resulted, and may in the future result, in a challenging capital raising environment, slower adoption of new technologies and increased competition, and any such disruptions may also magnify the impact of other risks described in this Annual Report on Form 20-F. See also “Risks Related to Israeli Law and Our Operations in Israel—Our headquarters and other significant operations are located in Israel and, therefore, our business and operations may be adversely affected by political, economic and military instability in Israel.”

 Risks Related to Our Business, Industry and Regulatory Requirements

We have focused substantially all of our efforts and resources on Allocetra™, and we may not obtain regulatory approval of Allocetra™.

We have focused substantially all of our efforts and financial resources in the research and development of Allocetra™. As a result, our business is primarily dependent on our ability to complete the development of, obtain regulatory approval for and successfully commercialize Allocetra™. The process to develop, obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize Allocetra™ is long, complex and costly, and its outcome is uncertain.

The research, testing, manufacturing, labeling, approval, sale, marketing and distribution of drugs and pharmaceutical products, including biologics, are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA, the EMA and regulatory agencies in other countries. These regulations differ from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. We are not permitted to market Allocetra™, or any other product candidate, in the United States until we receive approval of a biologics license application (“BLA”) from the FDA, or in the European Union until we receive a marketing authorization application (“MAA”) from the EMA, or in any foreign countries until we receive the requisite approval from the respective regulatory agencies in such countries. We have not yet obtained regulatory clearance to conduct confirmatory clinical trials that are necessary to file a BLA with the FDA or comparable applications to other regulatory authorities in other countries, nor have we received marketing approval for Allocetra™ in any country. The results of clinical trials may be unsatisfactory and, even if endpoints are successfully met, the FDA, or other regulatory authorities, may not approve our marketing application should we be in a position to file one.

Marketing approval procedures and timelines vary among countries and can involve additional product testing and additional administrative review periods. The approval process may include the risks detailed above, as well as other risks. In some countries and in specific programs, product approval depends on showing superiority to an approved alternative therapy. This can result in significant expenses for conducting complex clinical trials. In addition, time from approval to commercialization may significantly differ between countries. In particular, in many countries outside the United States, it is required that a product receives pricing and reimbursement approval before it can be commercialized. This can result in substantial delays in such countries. If we fail to comply with regulatory requirements in the United States or international markets or to obtain and maintain required approvals or if regulatory approvals in the United States or international markets are delayed, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of our products will be harmed.

Marketing approval in one jurisdiction does not ensure marketing approval in another, but a failure or delay in obtaining marketing approval in one jurisdiction may have a negative effect on the regulatory process in others. Failure to obtain marketing approval in other countries or any delay or setback in obtaining such approval would impair our ability to develop foreign markets for Allocetra™ or any other product candidate. This would reduce our target market and limit the full commercial potential of Allocetra™ or any other product candidate.

It is possible that none of our product candidates will achieve commercial success in a timely and cost-effective manner, or ever.

Even if regulatory authorities approve any of our product candidates, they may not be commercially successful. Our product candidates may not be commercially successful because, among other things, government agencies or other third-party payors may not provide reimbursement for the costs of the product or the reimbursement may be too low to be commercially successful. Also, physicians and others may not use or recommend our product candidates, even following regulatory approval. In addition, a product approval, even if issued, may limit the uses for which such product may be distributed, which could adversely affect the commercial viability of the product. Moreover, third parties may develop superior products or have proprietary rights that preclude us from marketing our product. Physician and patient acceptance of, and demand for, our products, if we obtain regulatory approval, will depend largely on many factors, including, but not limited to, the extent, if any, of reimbursement of costs by government agencies and other third-party payors, pricing, the effectiveness of our marketing and distribution efforts, the safety and effectiveness of alternative products, and the prevalence and severity of side effects associated with such products. If physicians, government agencies and other third-party payors do not accept the use or efficacy of our products, we will not be able to generate significant revenue, if any.

Results from our clinical trials may be negative or may not replicate the results of our preclinical trials or earlier clinical trials, which could require that we abandon development of Allocetra™, our other product candidates or any future product candidates, which will significantly impair our ability to generate revenues.

Upon the completion of any clinical trial, the results might not support the outcomes sought by us. Further, success in preclinical testing and early clinical trials does not ensure that later clinical trials will be successful, and the results of later clinical trials may not replicate the results of prior clinical trials and preclinical testing. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in late-stage clinical trials even after achieving promising results in early-stage development. Accordingly, the results from the completed preclinical studies and clinical trials for Allocetra™ may not be predictive of the results we may obtain in later stage trials of Allocetra™ or clinical trials of any of our other product candidates. Our clinical trials may produce negative or inconclusive results, and we may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional clinical trials. Moreover, clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain FDA or EMA, or other regulatory agency, approval for their products.

In addition, the clinical trial process may fail to demonstrate that Allocetra™ is safe and effective for its indicated uses. Any such failure may cause us to abandon Allocetra™ and may delay development of other product candidates. Any delay in, or termination or suspension of, our clinical trials will delay the requisite filings with the FDA or other regulatory agencies and, ultimately, our ability to commercialize our product candidates and generate revenues. If the clinical trials do not support our product claims, the completion of development of such product candidate may be significantly delayed or abandoned, which will significantly impair our ability to generate revenues and will materially adversely affect our results of operations.

Our strategic reprioritization and related reduction in force may not achieve our intended outcome.

In September 2023, we announced a strategic reprioritization plan, pursuant to which we determined to increase our existing focus on inflammatory and autoimmune indications. We have taken actions to reduce certain operational and workforce expenses that are no longer deemed core to our ongoing operations in order to extend our cash runway and support the timeline for the topline data readouts of the end-stage knee osteoarthritis Phase I/II trial as well as the randomized, controlled Phase II clinical trial in osteoarthritis. These actions included the sale of the leased manufacturing facility we constructed in Yavne, Israel, inclusive of the Equipment, and the suspension of the internal clinical development of our various oncology indications. As part of this strategy, we reduced our workforce by approximately 50%.

The reduction in force may result in unintended consequences and costs, such as the loss of institutional knowledge and expertise, attrition beyond the intended number of employees, decreased morale among our remaining employees, and the risk that we may not achieve the anticipated benefits of the reduction in force. The reduction in workforce could also make it difficult for us to pursue, or prevent us from pursuing, new opportunities and initiatives due to insufficient personnel, or require us to incur additional and unanticipated costs to hire new personnel to pursue such opportunities or initiatives. The workforce reduction could also harm our reputation, making our ability to recruit skilled personnel difficult. If we are unable to realize the anticipated benefits from the reduction in force, or if we experience significant adverse consequences from the reduction in force, our business, financial condition, and results of operations may be materially adversely affected.

Additionally, the prioritization of our capital resources in accordance with our reprioritization plan may not prove successful, and we may forego the pursuit of other indications, whether through future collaborations, licenses, other similar arrangements, or otherwise, that could be more successful. Furthermore, we may undertake further similar cost-saving initiatives, which may include additional restructuring or workforce reductions. These types of cost-reduction activities can be complex and result in unintended consequences and costs, including decreased employee morale, loss of institutional knowledge and expertise and could adversely impact our business and financial condition.

The clinical trial process is complex and expensive, and commencement and completion of clinical trials can be delayed or prevented for a number of reasons.

We may not be able to commence or complete the clinical trials required to support our submission of a BLA to the FDA or a MAA to the EMA or any similar submission to regulatory authorities in other countries. Drug development is a long, expensive and uncertain process, and delay or failure can occur at any stage of any of our clinical trials. The fact that the FDA, EMA or other regulatory authorities permit a company to conduct human clinical trials is no guarantee that the trial will be successful. To the contrary, most product candidates that enter clinical trials do not prove to be successful and do not result in the filing of a BLA, MAA or similar filing. Drug candidates that prove successful at one clinical trial phase may prove unsuccessful at a subsequent phase. Human clinical trials are very expensive and difficult to design and implement, in part because they are subject to rigorous regulatory requirements and in part because the results of clinical trials are inherently uncertain and unpredictable. Regulatory authorities, such as the FDA, may preclude clinical trials from proceeding. Additionally, the clinical trial process is time-consuming, and failure can occur at any stage of the trials. We may encounter problems that cause us to abandon or repeat clinical trials. The commencement and completion of clinical trials may be delayed by several factors, including:

Clinical trials may also be delayed or terminated as a result of ambiguous or negative interim results. In addition, a clinical trial may be suspended or terminated by us, the FDA or other regulatory authorities, the IRBs at the sites where such boards are overseeing a trial, or a Data and Safety Monitoring Board overseeing the clinical trial at issue or other regulatory authorities due to a number of factors, including:

Even when clinical trials are designed for patients to be randomized with comparable attributes across the treatment and placebo groups, significant imbalances in patient attributes across patient subgroups could make it challenging to analyze the efficacy of our product candidates. For example, in our Phase II trial evaluating Allocetra™ in patients with sepsis, the randomization resulted in the Allocetra™-treated cohorts having 20% higher frequency of septic shock and 35% higher frequency of invasive ventilation prior to treatment, as compared with the control group. Both of these patient attributes are associated with a significantly higher degree of difficulty of treatment and higher mortality rates. These imbalances have made it challenging to deduce the relative effect in other patient subgroups.

In addition, we or regulatory authorities may suspend our clinical trials at any time if it appears that we are exposing participants to unacceptable health risks, or if others report that similar products pose an unacceptable risk to patients, or if the regulatory authorities find deficiencies in our regulatory submissions or the conduct of such trials. Any suspension of clinical trials will delay possible regulatory approval, if any, and adversely affect our ability to develop products and generate revenue.

Obtaining approval of a BLA, MAA or other regulatory approval, even after clinical trials that are believed to be successful is an uncertain process.

Even if we complete our planned clinical trials and believe the results to be successful, all of which are uncertain, obtaining approval of a BLA, or similar regulatory application, is an extensive, lengthy, expensive and uncertain process, and the EMA, IMOH, the FDA and other regulatory agencies may delay, limit or deny approval of our product candidates for many reasons, including:

For example, in the sepsis clinical program vertical, before we can submit a marketing application, or similar regulatory application, to EMA, or other regulatory authorities, as applicable, we must complete the analysis of the results from our Phase II clinical trial, determine whether to pursue a potential follow-on, randomized, controlled study of a solely High Risk UTI sepsis population, and then must conduct pivotal Phase III clinical trials. Phase III clinical trials frequently produce unsatisfactory results even though prior clinical trials were successful. Therefore, the results of the additional trials that we conduct may or may not be successful. The applicable regulatory agencies may suspend all clinical trials or require that we conduct additional clinical, nonclinical, manufacturing, validation or drug product quality studies and submit those data before considering or reconsidering the marketing application, or similar regulatory application. Depending on the extent of these, or any other studies, approval of any applications that we submit may be delayed by several years, or may require us to expend more resources than we have available. It is also possible that additional studies, if performed and completed, may not be considered sufficient by the applicable regulatory agencies to provide regulatory approval. If any of these outcomes occur, we likely would not receive approval for Allocetra™, or any of our other product candidates, and may be forced to cease operations.

Even if we obtain regulatory approval for Allocetra™, or any of our other product candidates, the approval might contain significant limitations related to the intended uses for which the product is approved, including, without limitation, restrictions related to certain labeled populations, age groups, warnings, precautions or contraindications, or an approval may be subject to significant post-marketing studies or risk mitigation requirements. If we are unable to successfully commercialize Allocetra™, or any of our other product candidates, we may be forced to cease operations.

Changes in regulatory requirements and guidance or unanticipated events during our clinical trials may occur, which may result in necessary changes to clinical trial protocols, which could result in increased costs to us, delay our development timeline or reduce the likelihood of successful completion of our clinical trials.

Changes in regulatory requirements and guidance or unanticipated events during our clinical trials may occur, and as a result, we may need to amend our clinical trial protocols. Amendments may require us to resubmit our clinical trial protocols to IRBs for review and approval, which may adversely affect the cost, timing and successful completion of a clinical trial. If we experience delays in the completion of, or if we terminate, any of our clinical trials, the commercial prospects for our affected product candidates would be harmed and our ability to generate product revenue would be delayed, possibly materially.

Our manufacturing processes are complex, delicate and susceptible to contamination, and involve biological intermediates that are subject to stringent regulations.

Blood is a raw material that is susceptible to damage and contamination and may contain human pathogens, any of which would render the blood unsuitable as raw material for further manufacturing. For instance, improper storage of blood, by us or third-party suppliers, may require us to destroy some of our raw material. If unsuitable blood is not identified and discarded prior to the release of the blood to the manufacturing process, it may be necessary to discard intermediate or finished product made from that blood or to recall any finished product released to the market or individual patients, resulting in a charge to cost of goods sold.

The manufacture of Allocetra™ is a complex and delicate process of cell collection, separation, freezing, storing, incubation, harvesting, formulating and testing, each under aseptic conditions. First, cells are collected by separation from the blood donations at collection centers and medical centers. Donations for Allocetra^TM are collected from healthy donors through apheresis. The cells sourced for Allocetra^TM are then shipped to a manufacturing site for cryopreservation by trained personnel pursuant to current Good Manufacturing Practices (“cGMP”) requirements, FDA guidelines and our manufacturing protocol, as detailed in our Chemistry Manufacturing and Controls (“CMC”) protocols. Second, the cells are thawed, processed, prepared in an intravenous bag and tested according to our quality assurance and quality control assays and cGMP requirements. The final product is then shipped to the clinical site where it is infused into the patient within the predetermined expiration period. All shipping and handling are pursuant to carefully controlled conditions, including controlled temperatures, as required by applicable regulations. The manufacturing sites must be registered manufacturing facilities operating under cGMP requirements and all manufacturing activities, including cell collection, processing, testing, freezing, shipping, final product preparations, packaging and labeling, must be conducted by properly and adequately trained personnel in accordance with detailed protocols, batch records and our CMC and based on cGMP requirements and FDA, or other applicable regulatory, guidelines.

Allocetra™, and our other potential drug candidates, if any, may fail to meet our stringent specifications through a failure in one or more of these process steps. Such failure would prohibit us from releasing the drug at issue for human use until the failure is properly and sufficiently corrected and resolved. We may detect instances in which an unreleased product was produced, either internally (as is the case for small scale preclinical or early stage clinical production) or by a CMO (as would be the case for large scale production for which we would provide appropriate technology training and require EMA or FDA approval), without adherence to our manufacturing procedures or blood used in our production process was not collected, shipped, processed or stored in a compliant manner consistent with our current cGMP, or other regulations or regulatory requests, including those by the EMA. Such an event of non-compliance would likely result in our determination that the implicated product candidates should not be released and therefore should be destroyed. Even if handled properly, biologics may form or contain particulates or have other issues or problems after storage which may require destruction or recalls. The impact of such non-compliance or issues or problems would be exacerbated if our manufacturing efforts are scaled to conduct a Phase II or Phase III clinical trial in Europe, Israel or the United States, where there may be numerous collection sites and where shipments may be made to multiple locations with large numbers of patients across a large geographical area. There can be no assurance that we can scale such a manufacturing process, including in Europe, Israel and the United States, in a cost-effective or efficient manner, or in a manner that will meet all regulatory requirements, including EMA, IMOH or FDA requirements, if at all.

While we expect to write-off small amounts of work-in-progress in the ordinary course of business due to the complex nature of blood, our processes and our product candidates, unanticipated events may lead to write-offs and other costs materially in excess of our expectations and the reserves we have established for these purposes. Such write-offs and other costs could cause material fluctuations in our liquidity and results of operations. Furthermore, contamination of our product candidates could cause consumers or other third parties with whom we conduct business to lose confidence in the reliability of our manufacturing procedures, which could adversely affect our liquidity and results of operations. In addition, faulty or contaminated product candidates that are unknowingly distributed could result in patient harm, threaten the reputation of our products and expose us to product liability damages and claims from companies for whom we do contract manufacturing.

If we or any potential CMOs we retain in the future fail to comply with manufacturing regulations, our financial results and financial condition could be adversely affected.

Before a marketing application is approved, or before we begin the commercial manufacture of any of our products, CMOs and other outsourced manufacturing service providers we may engage must obtain regulatory approval of their manufacturing facilities, processes and quality systems. In addition, pharmaceutical manufacturing facilities are continuously subject to inspection by EMA and foreign regulatory authorities before and after product approval. Due to the complexity of the processes used to manufacture pharmaceutical products and product candidates, any potential third-party manufacturer may be unable to continue to pass or initially pass federal, state or international regulatory inspections in a cost-effective manner.

The EMA and foreign regulators require manufacturers to register manufacturing facilities. The EMA and foreign regulators also inspect these facilities to confirm compliance with requirements that the EMA or foreign regulators establish. We, to the extent we may manufacture our products in the future, or our materials suppliers may face manufacturing or quality control problems causing product production and shipment delays or a situation where we or the supplier may not be able to maintain compliance with the EMA’s or foreign regulators’ requirements necessary to continue manufacturing our product candidate. Any failure to comply with EMA or foreign regulatory requirements could adversely affect our clinical research activities and our ability to develop and market our product candidate and any future product candidates.

If a third-party manufacturer with whom we contract is unable to comply with manufacturing regulations, we may be subject to fines, unanticipated compliance expenses, recall or seizure of our products, total or partial suspension of production and/or enforcement actions, including injunctions, and criminal or civil prosecution. These possible sanctions would adversely affect our financial results and financial condition.

Our ability to produce safe and effective products depends on the safety of our blood supply against transmittable diseases.

Despite overlapping safeguards, including the screening of donors and GMP aseptic manufacturing under a quality controlled governing system, the risk of transmissible disease through blood products cannot be entirely eliminated. For example, because blood-derived therapeutics involve the use and purification of human blood, there has been concern raised about the risk of transmitting human immunodeficiency virus (“HIV”), West Nile virus, H1N1 virus or “swine flu” and other blood-borne pathogens and infectious agents through blood-derived products. There are also concerns about the future transmission of H5N1 virus, or “bird flu.” In the 1980s, thousands of hemophiliacs worldwide were infected with HIV through the use of contaminated Factor VIII.

New infectious diseases emerge in the human population from time to time. If a new infectious disease has a period during which time the causative agent is present in the bloodstream but symptoms are not present, it is possible that blood donations could be contaminated by that infectious agent. Typically, early in an outbreak of a new disease, tests for the causative agent do not exist. During this early phase, we must rely on screening of donors and patients (e.g., for behavioral risk factors or physical symptoms) to reduce the risk of blood contamination. Screening methods are generally less sensitive and specific than a direct test as a means of identifying potentially contaminated blood units.

During the early phase of an outbreak of a new infectious disease, our ability to manufacture safe products would depend on the manufacturing process’ capacity to inactivate or remove the infectious agent. To the extent that a product’s manufacturing process is inadequate to inactivate or remove an infectious agent, our ability to manufacture and distribute that product would be impaired.

If a new infectious disease were to emerge in the human population, the regulatory and public health authorities could impose precautions to limit the transmission of the disease that would impair our ability to procure blood, manufacture our product candidates or both. Such precautionary measures could be taken before there is conclusive medical or scientific evidence that a disease poses a risk for blood-derived products.

In recent years, new testing and viral inactivation methods have been developed that more effectively detect and inactivate infectious viruses in collected blood. There can be no assurance, however, that such new testing and inactivation methods will adequately screen for, and inactivate, infectious agents in the blood used in the production of our product candidates.

Our product candidates may produce undesirable side effects that we may not detect in our clinical trials, which could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of any such product candidate and could substantially increase commercialization costs or even force us to cease operations.

Even if Allocetra™, or any of our other product candidates, receives marketing approval, we or others may later identify undesirable side effects caused by the product, and, in that event, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including, without limitation:

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the affected product candidate and could substantially increase commercialization costs or even force us to cease operations.

Even if Allocetra™ or any other product candidate that we may develop receives marketing approval, we will continue to face extensive regulatory requirements, and any such product may still face future development and regulatory difficulties. In addition, we are subject to government regulations, and we may experience delays in obtaining required regulatory approvals to market our proposed product candidates.

Even if we receive regulatory approval to market a particular product candidate, any such product will remain subject to extensive regulatory requirements, including requirements relating to manufacturing, labeling, packaging, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion, distribution and recordkeeping. Even if regulatory approval of a product is granted, the approval may be subject to limitations on the uses for which the product may be marketed or the conditions of approval, or may contain requirements for costly post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor the safety or efficacy of the product, which could adversely affect us by reducing revenues or increasing expenses, and cause the approved product candidate not to be commercially viable. In addition, as clinical experience with a drug expands after approval, typically because it is used by a greater number and more diverse group of patients after approval than during clinical trials, side effects and other problems may be observed over time after approval that were not seen or anticipated during pre-approval clinical trials or other studies. Any adverse effects observed after the approval and marketing of a product candidate could result in limitations on the use of or withdrawal of any approved products from the marketplace. The absence of long-term safety data may also limit the approved uses of our products, if any. If we fail to comply with the regulatory requirements of the EMA, and other applicable U.S. and foreign regulatory authorities, or previously unknown problems with any approved commercial products, manufacturers or manufacturing processes are discovered, we could be subject to administrative or judicially imposed sanctions or other setbacks, including, without limitation, the following:

In addition, various aspects of our operations are subject to federal, state or local laws, rules and regulations, any of which may change from time to time. Costs arising out of any regulatory developments could be time-consuming and expensive and could divert management resources and attention and, consequently, could adversely affect our business operations and financial performance.

Delays in regulatory approval, limitations in regulatory approval and withdrawals of regulatory approval may have a material adverse effect on the Company.

If we receive marketing approval for any of our product candidates, sales will be limited unless the product achieves broad market acceptance.

The commercial success of our product candidates and any future product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval from the EMA, or other regulatory authorities, will depend on the breadth of its approved labeling and upon the acceptance of the product by the medical community, including physicians, patients and third-party payors. The degree of market acceptance of any approved product will depend on a number of factors, including, without limitation:

If any of our product candidates is approved but does not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, third-party payors and patients, we may not generate sufficient revenue from the product, and we may not become profitable. In addition, our efforts to educate the medical community and third-party payors on the benefits of the product may require significant resources and may never be successful.

Any collaboration arrangements that we may enter into in the future may not be successful, which could adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our current and any future product candidates.

We have collaboration arrangements with certain medical institutions, and we may determine to seek collaboration arrangements with pharmaceutical or biotechnology companies for the development and commercialization of our current and any future product candidates. Pursuant to the strategic reprioritization plan we adopted in September 2023, the Company ceased the internal clinical development of its various oncology indications and plans to seek external collaborations or out-licensing opportunities for the development of Allocetra™ as a next-generation solid cancer immunotherapy. We will face, to the extent that we decide to enter into future collaboration agreements, significant competition in seeking appropriate collaborators. Moreover, collaboration arrangements are complex and time consuming to negotiate, document and implement. We may not be successful in our efforts to establish and implement collaborations or other alternative arrangements. Additionally, the terms of any collaborations or other arrangements that we may establish may not be favorable to us.

Any future collaborations that we enter into may not be successful. The success of our collaboration arrangements, if any, would depend heavily on the efforts and activities of our collaborators. Collaborators generally have significant discretion in determining the efforts and resources that they will apply to these collaborations. For example, we may not be able to control the amount and timing of resources that the collaboration partner devotes to the product development or marketing programs, the collaboration partner may experience financial difficulties, or we may be required to relinquish important rights such as marketing, distribution, and intellectual property rights.

Disagreements between parties to a collaboration arrangement regarding clinical development and commercialization matters can lead to delays in the development process or commercializing the applicable product candidate and, in some cases, termination of the collaboration arrangement. These disagreements can be difficult to resolve.

Collaborations with pharmaceutical or biotechnology companies and other third parties are often terminated or allowed to expire by the other party. Any such termination or expiration could adversely affect us financially and could harm our business reputation.

We cannot be certain that, following a collaboration, strategic transaction or license, we will achieve the results, revenue, or specific net income that justifies such transaction.

If we acquire or in-license additional technologies or product candidates, we may incur additional costs, have integration difficulties and experience other risks that could harm our business and results of operations.

We may acquire and in-license additional product candidates and technologies. Any product candidate or technologies we in-license or acquire will likely require additional development efforts prior to commercial sale, including extensive preclinical or clinical testing, or both, and approval by EMA and applicable foreign regulatory authorities, if any. All product candidates are prone to risks of failure inherent in pharmaceutical product development, including the possibility that the product candidate, or products developed based on in-licensed technology, will not be shown to be sufficiently safe and effective for approval by regulatory authorities. In addition, we cannot assure you that any product candidate that we develop based on acquired or in-licensed technology that is granted regulatory approval will be manufactured or produced economically, successfully commercialized or widely accepted or competitive in the marketplace. Moreover, integrating any newly acquired or in-licensed product candidates could be expensive and time-consuming. If we cannot effectively manage these aspects of our business strategy, our business may not succeed. 

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

The EMA and other regulatory agencies strictly regulate promotional claims about prescription products. In particular, a product may not be promoted for uses that are not approved by the EMA or such other regulatory agencies as reflected in the product’s approved labeling. In particular, any labeling approved by such regulatory agencies for our products, if any, may also include restrictions on use. Such regulatory agencies may impose further requirements or restrictions on the distribution or use of our products as part of a mandatory plan, such as limiting prescribing to certain physicians or medical centers that have undergone specialized training, limiting treatment to patients who meet certain safe-use criteria and requiring treated patients to enroll in a registry. If we receive marketing approval for our product candidates, physicians may nevertheless prescribe our products to their patients in a manner that is inconsistent with the approved label. If we are found to have promoted such “off-label” uses, we may become subject to significant liability. In particular, the U.S. federal government has levied large civil and criminal fines against companies for alleged improper promotion and has enjoined several companies from engaging in off-label promotion. The EMA has also requested that companies enter into consent decrees or permanent injunctions under which specified promotional conduct is changed or curtailed.

We may be subject to extensive environmental, health and safety, and other laws and regulations in multiple jurisdictions.

Our business involves the controlled use, including through our service providers, of hazardous materials, various biological compounds and chemicals; therefore, we, our agents and our service providers may be subject to various environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those governing air emissions, water and wastewater discharges, the use, management and disposal of hazardous, radioactive and biological materials and wastes and the cleanup of contaminated sites. The risk of accidental contamination or injury from these materials cannot be eliminated. If an accident, spill or release of any regulated 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 may incur substantial capital costs and operating expenses and may be required to obtain consents to comply with any environmental and health laws or regulations and the terms and conditions of any permits required pursuant to such laws and regulations, including costs incurred by us to install new or updated pollution control equipment for our service providers, modify our operations or perform other corrective actions at our facilities or the facilities of our service providers. In addition, fines and penalties may be imposed on us, our agents and/or our service providers for non-compliance 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.

We expect the healthcare industry to face increased limitations on reimbursement, rebates and other payments as a result of healthcare reform, which could adversely affect third-party coverage of our products and how much or under what circumstances healthcare providers will prescribe or administer our products.

In Europe and in other countries, sales of our products, if any, will depend in part upon the availability of reimbursement from third-party payors, which include governmental authorities, managed care organizations and other private health insurers. Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the price and examining the cost effectiveness of medical products and services.

Increasing expenditures for healthcare have been the subject of considerable public attention in Europe and the United States. Both private and government entities are seeking ways to reduce or contain healthcare costs. Numerous proposals that would effect changes in the European and U.S. healthcare systems have been introduced or proposed, including reducing reimbursement for prescription products and reducing the levels at which consumers and healthcare providers are reimbursed for purchases of pharmaceutical products.

Although we cannot predict the full effect on our business of the implementation of existing legislation or the enactment of additional legislation pursuant to healthcare and other legislative reform, we believe that legislation or regulations that would reduce reimbursement for, or restrict coverage of, our products could adversely affect how much or under what circumstances healthcare providers will prescribe or administer our products. This could materially and adversely affect our business by reducing our ability to generate revenue, raise capital, obtain additional collaborators and market our products. In addition, we believe the increasing emphasis on managed care in the United States has and will continue to put pressure on the price and usage of pharmaceutical products, which may adversely impact product sales.

It will be difficult for us to profitably sell our future products, if any, if reimbursement for any such product is limited by government authorities and third-party payor policies.

In addition to any healthcare reform measures that may affect reimbursement, market acceptance and sales of our future products, if any, will depend on the reimbursement policies of government authorities and third-party payors. Government authorities and third-party payors, such as private health insurers and health maintenance organizations, decide which medications they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels. A primary trend in the European and U.S. healthcare industries, as well as elsewhere, is cost containment. Government authorities and these third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medications. We cannot be sure that reimbursement will be available for our future products, if any, and, if reimbursement is available, the level of reimbursement. Reimbursement may impact the demand for, or the price of, any product for which we obtain marketing approval. In addition, third-party payors are likely to impose strict requirements for reimbursement in order to limit off-label use of a higher priced drug or treatment. Reimbursement by a third-party payor may depend upon a number of factors including the third-party payor’s determination that use of a product is:

Obtaining coverage and reimbursement approval for a product from a government or other third-party payor is a time-consuming and costly process that could require us to provide supporting scientific, clinical and cost effectiveness data for the use of our products to the payor. We may not be able to provide data sufficient to gain acceptance with respect to coverage and reimbursement. We cannot be sure that coverage or adequate reimbursement will be available for our future products. Also, we cannot be sure that reimbursement amounts will not reduce the demand for, or the price of, our future products. If reimbursement is not available, or is available only to limited levels, we may not be able to commercialize our product candidate, or any future product candidates, profitably, or at all, even if approved.

Governments outside the United States tend to impose strict price controls, which may adversely affect our future revenues, if any.

In some countries, particularly the countries comprising the EU, the pricing of pharmaceuticals and certain other therapeutics is subject to governmental control. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after the receipt of marketing approval for a product. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of our product candidate to other available therapies. If reimbursement of our products is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, our business could be harmed, possibly materially.

We are subject to anti-kickback laws and regulations. Our failure to comply with these laws and regulations could have adverse consequences to us.

There are extensive international and U.S. federal and state laws and regulations prohibiting fraud and abuse in the healthcare industry that can result in significant criminal and civil penalties. Such U.S. federal laws include: the anti-kickback statute, which prohibits certain business practices and relationships, including the payment or receipt of compensation for the generation of business that will be paid by Medicare or other federal healthcare programs; the physician self-referral prohibition, commonly referred to as the Stark Law; the anti-inducement law, which prohibits providers from offering anything to a Medicare or Medicaid beneficiary to induce that beneficiary to use items or services covered by either program; the False Claims Act, which prohibits any person from knowingly presenting or causing to be presented false or fraudulent claims for payment by the federal government, including the Medicare and Medicaid programs; and the Civil Monetary Penalties Law, which authorizes the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to impose civil penalties administratively for fraudulent or abusive acts. In addition, the Affordable Care Act requires drug manufacturers to report to the government any payments to physicians for consulting services and the like. Many jurisdictions outside the United States have similar anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, and healthcare laws and regulations, and we could be subject to these laws and regulations to the extent that we operate in such jurisdictions.

Sanctions for violating these federal laws include criminal and civil penalties that range from punitive sanctions, damage assessments, monetary penalties, imprisonment, denial of Medicare and Medicaid payments or exclusion from the Medicare and Medicaid programs, or both, and debarment. As federal and state budget pressures continue, federal and state administrative agencies may also continue to escalate investigation and enforcement efforts to reduce or eliminate waste and to control fraud and abuse in governmental healthcare programs. Private enforcement of healthcare fraud has also increased, due in large part to amendments to the Civil False Claims Act in 1986 that were designed to encourage private persons to sue on behalf of the government. Efforts to ensure compliance with any of these federal, state and other fraud and abuse laws and regulations may involve substantial costs, and a violation of the same could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity and financial condition. An investigation into the use by physicians of any of our products, if ever commercialized, may dissuade physicians from either purchasing or using them, and could have a material adverse effect on our ability to commercialize those products.

Our market is subject to intense competition. If we are unable to compete effectively, Allocetra™ or any other product candidate that we may develop may be rendered uncompetitive or obsolete.

There are a number of products in development for the treatment or prevention of sepsis and osteoarthritis and the other autoimmune and inflammatory disorders that we are targeting or intend to target in the future, most of which are being developed by companies that are far larger than us, with significantly greater resources and more experience. The FDA has approved several therapies for the treatment of osteoarthritis, including a certain treatment specifically for knee osteoarthritis. Further, our industry is highly competitive and subject to rapid and significant technological change. Our potential competitors include large, fully-integrated pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, specialty pharmaceutical and generic drug companies, academic institutions, government agencies and research institutions. All of these competitors currently engage in, have engaged in or may engage in the future in the development, manufacturing, marketing and commercialization of new pharmaceuticals, some of which may compete with our product candidates. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large, established companies. These companies may have products in development that are superior to Allocetra™ or any other product candidate that we may develop. Key competitive factors affecting the commercial success of Allocetra™ and any other product candidates that we may develop are likely to be efficacy, time of onset, safety and tolerability profile, reliability, convenience of dosing, price and reimbursement. Furthermore, even if Allocetra™ and any other product candidates that we may develop are able to achieve these attributes, and are approved, acceptance of our products may be inhibited by the reluctance of physicians to switch from existing therapies to our products, or if physicians choose to reserve our products for use in limited circumstances.

Many of our potential competitors have substantially greater financial, technical and human resources than we do and significantly greater experience in the discovery and development of drug candidates, obtaining EMA and other regulatory approvals of products and the commercialization of those products. Accordingly, our competitors may be more successful than us in obtaining EMA and other marketing approvals for drugs and achieving widespread market acceptance. Our competitors’ drugs may be more effective, or more effectively marketed and sold, than any drug we may commercialize, which may render Allocetra™ or any other product candidates that we may develop obsolete or uncompetitive before we can recover the expenses of developing and commercializing the product. We anticipate that we will face intense and increasing competition as new drugs enter the market and advanced technologies become available. Finally, the development of new treatment methods for the diseases and disorders we are targeting could render Allocetra™ or any other product candidates that we may develop, uncompetitive or obsolete. If we cannot successfully compete with new or existing products, our marketing and sales will suffer and we may never be profitable.

Our competitors currently include companies with marketed products and/or an advanced research and development pipeline. If Allocetra™ for the treatment of moderate to severe knee osteoarthritis is approved for commercial sale, it would face competition from existing approved treatments for knee osteoarthritis, many of which may have achieved commercial success. To compete successfully in the market for treatment of osteoarthritis, we need to disrupt currently marketed drugs, meaning that we will have to demonstrate that the relative cost, method of administration, safety, tolerability and efficacy of Allocetra™ provides a better alternative to existing and new therapies. Moreover, several companies have reported the commencement of research projects related to the treatment or prevention of sepsis and osteoarthritis. We face competition with respect to Allocetra™ for the treatment of the Indications, and will face competition with respect to any product candidates that we may seek to develop or commercialize in the future, from major biopharmaceutical companies, specialty biopharmaceutical companies, and biotechnology companies worldwide.

Significant disruptions of information technology systems, cyberattacks and other security breaches could compromise our proprietary and confidential information, which could harm our business and reputation.

In the ordinary course of our business, we generate, collect and store proprietary information, including clinical trial subject, intellectual property and business information. We rely on sophisticated information technology systems, including software, cloud services and network-connected control systems, some of which are managed, hosted, provided or serviced by third parties. The secure storage, maintenance, and transmission of and access to this information is important to our operations, including our research and development efforts, and reputation. The future operation, success and growth of our business depends on streamlined processes made available through our uninhibited access to information systems, global communications, internet activity and other network processes. Further, because certain employees are working remotely, our reliance on our and third-party information technology systems has increased, which could increase our cybersecurity risk, create data accessibility concerns and make us more susceptible to communication disruptions, any of which could adversely impact our business operations.

Like most other companies, despite our current security measures and process controls, our information technology systems, and those of our third-party service providers, may be vulnerable to information security breaches, ransomware or extortion, mishandled data, acts of vandalism, computer viruses and interruption or loss of valuable business data. Stored data might be improperly accessed due to a variety of events beyond our control, including, but not limited to, damage and interruption from power loss or natural disasters, computer system and network failures, loss of telecommunications services, physical and electronic loss of access to data and information, terrorist attacks, hackers, security breaches or other security incidents, and computer viruses or attacks. A failure at any third parties who maintain our information technology systems to provide adequate and timely support could adversely affect the operation of our information technology systems.

Hackers and data thieves are increasingly sophisticated and operate large-scale and complex attacks which may remain undetected until after they occur. Computer hackers may attempt to penetrate our computer systems or those of our third party vendors and, if successful, misappropriate our proprietary and confidential information including e-mails and other electronic communications. In addition, an employee, contractor, or other third party with whom we do business may attempt to obtain such information, and may purposefully or inadvertently cause a breach involving such information. Any such compromise of our data security and access to, or public disclosure or loss of, confidential business or proprietary information could disrupt our operations, damage our reputation, provide our competitors with valuable information and subject us to additional costs, which could adversely affect our business.

The costs of mitigating cybersecurity risks are significant and are likely to increase in the future. These costs include, but are not limited to, retaining the services of cybersecurity providers; compliance costs arising out of existing and future cybersecurity, data protection and privacy laws and regulations; costs related to maintaining redundant networks, data backups and other damage-mitigation measures; and extra administrative costs to mitigate risk and deal with any system breaches.

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

Our products and product candidates could cause adverse effects. These adverse effects may not be observed in clinical trials, but may nonetheless occur in the future. If any of these adverse effects occur, they may render our product candidates ineffective or harmful in some patients, and our sales would suffer, materially adversely affecting our business, financial conditions and results of operations.

In addition, potential adverse effects caused by our product candidates, or products, could lead to product liability claims. Product liability claims might be brought against us by consumers, healthcare providers or others coming into contact with our products. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against product liability claims, we could incur substantial liabilities. In addition, regardless of merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims may result in:

If product liability lawsuits are successfully brought against us, our insurance may be inadequate.

We have obtained liability insurance coverage for our clinical trials with limits that are customary for such trials. However, our insurance coverage may not be sufficient to reimburse us for any expenses or losses we may suffer. Moreover, insurance coverage is becoming increasingly expensive, and, in the future, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses due to liability. If and when we obtain marketing approval for any of our product candidates, we intend to expand our insurance coverage to include the sale of commercial products; however, we may be unable to obtain this product liability insurance on commercially reasonable terms. On occasion, large judgments have been awarded in class action lawsuits based on drugs that had unanticipated side effects. The cost of any product liability litigation or other proceedings, even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial. A successful product liability claim, or series of claims, brought against us could cause our share price to decline and, if judgments exceed our insurance coverage, could decrease our cash and adversely affect our business.

The product liability insurance we will need to obtain in connection with the commercial sales of our product candidates, if and when they receive regulatory approval, may be unavailable in meaningful amounts or at a reasonable cost. If we are the subject of a successful product liability claim that exceeds the limits of any insurance coverage we obtain, we would incur substantial charges that would adversely affect our earnings and require the commitment of capital resources that might otherwise be available for the development and commercial launch of our product programs.

If we are unable to obtain adequate insurance to protect our business and property against damage, our financial condition could be adversely affected in the event of uninsured or inadequately insured loss or damage. Our ability to effectively recruit and retain qualified officers and directors could also be adversely affected if we experience difficulty in obtaining adequate directors’ and officers’ liability insurance.

We may not be able to obtain insurance policies on terms affordable to us that would adequately insure our business and property against damage, loss or claims by third parties. To the extent our business or property suffers any damages, losses or claims by third parties, which are not covered, or adequately covered, by insurance, our financial condition may be materially adversely affected. If we are unable to obtain appropriate insurance, medical centers may be unwilling or unable to enter into site agreements to clinically test our candidate products.

We may be unable to maintain sufficient insurance as a public company to cover liability claims made against our officers and directors. If we are unable to adequately insure our officers and directors, we may not be able to retain or recruit qualified officers and directors to manage the Company.

We manage our business through a small number of senior executive officers. We depend on them even more than similarly situated companies.

Our future growth and success depends on our ability to recruit, retain, manage and motivate our senior executive officers. The loss of the services of our management personnel, including without limitation, our Executive Chairman, Shai Novik, our Chief Executive Officer, Dr. Oren Hershkovitz, or our VP Medical, Dr. Einat Galamidi, or our founder, Prof. Dror Mevorach, or the inability to hire or retain experienced management personnel could adversely affect our ability to execute our business plan and harm our operating results.

Because of the specialized scientific nature of our business, we rely heavily on our ability to attract and retain qualified senior executive officers with scientific and technical experience. In particular, the loss of one or more of our senior executive officers could be detrimental to us if we cannot recruit suitable replacements in a timely manner. We do not currently carry “key person” insurance on the lives of members of senior management. The competition for qualified personnel in the pharmaceutical field is intense. Due to this intense competition, we may be unable to attract and retain qualified personnel necessary for the development of our business or to recruit suitable replacement personnel.

We incur significant costs as a result of operating as a public company, and our management devotes substantial time to compliance initiatives. We may fail to comply with the rules that apply to public companies, including Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which could result in sanctions or other penalties that would harm our business.

We incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses as a public company, including costs relating to public company reporting obligations under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). and regulations regarding corporate governance practices. Our management and other personnel devote a substantial amount of time to ensure that we comply with all of these requirements. Moreover, the reporting requirements, rules and regulations result in considerable legal and financial compliance costs. Any changes we make to comply with these obligations may not be sufficient to allow us to satisfy our obligations as a public company on a timely basis, or at all. These reporting requirements, rules and regulations, coupled with the increase in potential litigation exposure associated with being a public company, could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors (the “Board,” or the “Board of Directors”) or Board committees or to serve as executive officers, or to obtain certain types of insurance, including directors’ and officers’ liability insurance, on acceptable terms.

We are subject to Section 404 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or Section 404, and the related rules of the SEC, which generally require our management and independent registered public accounting firm to report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. The continuous process of strengthening our internal controls and complying with Section 404 is complicated and time-consuming. As our business continues to grow both domestically and internationally, our internal controls will become more complex and will require significantly more resources and attention to ensure our internal controls remain effective overall.

During the course of our review and testing of our internal controls, we may identify deficiencies and be unable to remediate them before we must provide the required reports. Furthermore, if we have a material weakness in our internal controls over financial reporting, we may not detect errors on a timely basis and our financial statements may be materially misstated. We or our independent registered public accounting firm may not be able to conclude on an ongoing basis that we have effective internal control over financial reporting, which could harm our operating results, cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information and cause the trading price of our shares to fall.

Environmental, social and corporate governance (“ESG”) issues, including those related to climate change and sustainability, may have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and damage our reputation.

There is an increasing focus from certain investors, customers, consumers, employees and other stakeholders concerning ESG matters. Additionally, public interest and legislative pressure related to public companies’ ESG practices continue to grow. If our ESG practices fail to meet regulatory requirements or investor, customer, consumer, employee or other stakeholders’ evolving expectations and standards for responsible corporate citizenship in areas including environmental stewardship, support for local communities, Board of Directors and employee diversity, human capital management, employee health and safety practices, product quality, supply chain management, corporate governance and transparency, our reputation, brand and employee retention may be negatively impacted, and our customers and suppliers may be unwilling to continue to do business with us.

Customers, consumers, investors and other stakeholders are increasingly focusing on environmental issues, including climate change, energy and water use, plastic waste and other sustainability concerns. Concern over climate change may result in new or increased legal and regulatory requirements to reduce or mitigate impacts to the environment. Changing customer and consumer preferences or increased regulatory requirements may result in increased demands or requirements regarding plastics and packaging materials, including single-use and non-recyclable plastic products and packaging, other components of our products and their environmental impact on sustainability, or increased customer and consumer concerns or perceptions (whether accurate or inaccurate) regarding the effects of substances present in certain of our products. Complying with these demands or requirements could cause us to incur additional manufacturing, operating or product development costs.

If we do not adapt to or comply with new regulations, including the SEC’s recently approved rules that require companies to provide significantly expanded climate-related disclosures in their periodic reporting (assuming the ultimate implementation of such rules following the current stay thereof), or fail to meet evolving investor, industry or stakeholder expectations and concerns regarding ESG issues, investors may reconsider their capital investment in our Company, we may become subject to penalties, and customers and consumers may choose to stop purchasing our products, if approved for commercialization, which could have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business or financial condition.

Risks Related to Our Reliance on Third Parties

We may rely on third party manufacturers to manufacture our product candidates for purposes of clinical trials and commercial quantities of our product candidates, if and when approved for marketing by the applicable regulatory authorities. 

With respect to the production of the starting material required for future clinical trials, we may rely either on our own manufacturing capabilities or on third-parties. We currently and in the future will rely upon blood banks and collection service facilities for the collection of starting material for the production of Allocetra™. We plan to initially rely upon hospitals, other health care providers, contract manufacturers and, potentially, collaboration partners, to manufacture commercial quantities of our product candidates, if and when approved for marketing by the applicable regulatory authorities. Although we have not yet engaged any contract manufacturers or other service providers, if and when we do, our contract manufacturers and service providers must complete technology transfer, process validation for the manufacturing process and demonstrate successful manufacturing of comparable product. If our contract manufacturers and service providers, and their respective facilities, as applicable, are not approved by EMA, or other applicable regulatory authorities, our commercial supply of the product candidate will be significantly delayed and may result in significant additional costs. If we need to identify additional finished product manufacturers, we would not be able to do so without significant delay and likely significant additional cost.

Our and our contract manufacturers’ and other service providers’ failure to achieve and maintain high manufacturing standards, in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements, or the incidence of manufacturing errors, could result in patient injury or death, product shortages, product recalls or withdrawals, delays or failures in product testing or delivery, cost overruns or other problems that could seriously harm our business. Contract manufacturers and service providers often encounter difficulties involving production yields, quality control and quality assurance, as well as shortages of qualified personnel. Our future contract manufacturers and service providers may not perform as agreed or may not remain in the contract manufacturing business. In the event of a natural disaster, business failure, strike or other difficulty, we may be unable to replace our manufacturing capacity or a third-party manufacturer or provider in a timely manner and the production of our product candidates would be interrupted, resulting in delays and additional costs. See also “Risk Factors—Risks Related to our Business, Industry and Regulatory Requirements—Our manufacturing processes are complex, delicate and susceptible to contamination, and involve biological intermediates that are subject to stringent regulations.”

We intend to rely primarily on third parties to market and sell Allocetra™ and any other product candidate.

We have no sales or distribution capabilities. To the extent we rely on third parties to commercialize our products, if marketing approval is obtained, we may receive less revenue than if we commercialize such products ourselves. In addition, we would have less control over the sales efforts of any third parties involved in our commercialization efforts. In the event we are unable to collaborate with a third-party marketing and sales organization to commercialize our products, particularly for broader patient populations, our ability to generate revenue will be limited.

Although we may ultimately develop a marketing and sales force with technical expertise and supporting distribution capabilities in the longer term, we do not currently intend to do so; therefore, we will be unable to directly market our products, if any, in the near future. To promote any of our potential products through third parties, we will have to locate acceptable third parties for these functions and enter into agreements with them on acceptable terms, and we may not be able to do so. Any third-party arrangements we are able to enter into may result in lower revenues than we could achieve by directly marketing and selling our potential products. In addition, to the extent that we depend on third parties for marketing and distribution, any revenues we receive will depend upon the efforts of such third parties, as well as the terms of our agreements with such third parties, which cannot be predicted in most cases at this time. As a result, we might not be able to market and sell our products in the United States or overseas, which would have a material adverse effect on us.

We depend on third parties to conduct our clinical trials.

We currently rely, and for the foreseeable future, will continue to rely, on third parties, such as CROs, medical institutions, clinical investigators and contract laboratories to oversee most of the operations of our clinical trials and to perform data collection and analysis. As a result, we may face additional delays outside of our control if these parties do not perform their obligations in a timely fashion or in accordance with regulatory requirements. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations and meet expected deadlines, if they need to be replaced, or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols or for other reasons, our financial results and the commercial prospects for our product candidates or any other potential product candidates could be harmed, our costs could increase and our ability to obtain regulatory approval and commence product sales could be delayed.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

The failure to obtain or maintain patents, licensing agreements and other intellectual property could impact our ability to compete effectively.

To compete effectively, we need to develop and maintain a proprietary position with regard to our own technologies, intellectual property, licensing agreements, product candidates and business. Legal standards relating to the validity and scope of claims in the biotechnology and biopharmaceutical fields are still evolving. Therefore, the degree of future protection for our proprietary rights in our core technologies and any product candidates or products that might be developed using these technologies is also uncertain. The risks and uncertainties that we face with respect to our patents and other proprietary rights include the following:

We cannot be certain that patents will be issued as a result of any of our pending applications, and we cannot be certain that any of our issued patents, whether issued pursuant to our pending applications or licensed from third parties, will give us adequate protection from competing products. For example, issued patents may be circumvented or challenged, declared invalid or unenforceable, or narrowed in scope, and changes in the law may affect the utility of a pending patent application or issued patent. In addition, because publication of discoveries in the scientific or patent literature often lags behind actual discoveries, we cannot be certain that we were the first to make our inventions or to file patent applications covering those inventions. If any of our composition of matter patents, or pending applications, was subject to a successful challenge or failed to issue, our business and competitive advantage could be significantly affected. 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.

Although we expect to do so, we may not be able to submit a marketing application seeking approval of Allocetra™ prior to the applicable patents’ expiration date, assuming all necessary patents are in fact issued. Moreover, we cannot be certain that we will be the first applicant to obtain EMA approval for any indication of our product candidates and we cannot be certain that we will be entitled to any other exclusivity with respect to the same. Such a diminution of our proprietary position could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operation and financial condition.

Our ability to protect and enforce our patents does not guarantee that we will secure the right to commercialize our patents.

A patent is a limited monopoly right conferred upon its holder, and such holder’s successors in title, in return for the making and disclosing of a new and non-obvious invention. This monopoly is of limited duration but, while in force, allows the patent holder to prevent others from making and/or using his/her invention without the patent holder’s consent. While a patent gives the holder this right to exclude others, it is not a license to commercialize the invention, where other permissions may be required for permissible commercialization to occur. Further, the invention, even if patented itself, cannot be commercialized if it infringes the valid patent rights of another party.

Others may obtain issued patents that could require us to obtain licenses requiring the payment of significant fees or royalties in order to enable us to conduct our business. As to those patents that we may license, our rights would depend on maintaining our obligations under the applicable license agreement, and we may be unable to do so. The requirement to either obtain licenses or to maintain our obligations under license agreements, even if successful, could be costly for us and there is no guarantee such licenses will permit us to commercialize the underlying patents.

We may rely on trade secrets and proprietary know-how to protect our proprietary technology, which can be difficult to trace and enforce and, if we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, our business and competitive position would be harmed.

We require our employees, consultants, advisors and collaborators to enter into confidentiality agreements that prohibit the disclosure of confidential information to any other parties. We also require our employees and consultants to disclose and assign to us their ideas, developments, discoveries and inventions. These agreements may not, however, provide adequate protection for our trade secrets, know-how or other proprietary information in the event of any unauthorized use or disclosure. Despite these efforts, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose our proprietary information, including our trade secrets, and we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for such breaches. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret is difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, some courts inside and outside the United States are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. If any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor or other third party, we would have no right to prevent them from using that technology or information to compete with us. If any of our trade secrets were to be disclosed to or independently developed by a competitor or other third party, our business and competitive position would be harmed.

We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world.

Patents are of national or regional effect, and filing, prosecuting and defending patents on all of our product candidates throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive. As such, we may not be able to prevent third parties from duplicating our inventions, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions, in countries outside those for which we have legally obtained patent protection,. Further, the legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to pharmaceuticals or biologics, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. In addition, certain developing countries, including China and India, have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In those countries, we may have limited remedies if patents are infringed or if we are compelled to grant a license to a third party, which could materially diminish the value of those patents. This could limit our potential revenue opportunities, and could materially adversely affect our competitive advantage, business and results of operations. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license.

The biotechnology industry has been characterized by significant litigation and other proceedings regarding patents, patent applications, and other intellectual property rights.

The biotechnology industry has been characterized by extensive and frequent litigation regarding patents and other intellectual property rights. The situations in which we may become parties to such litigation or proceedings may include:

The costs of resolving any patent litigation, or other intellectual property proceeding, even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial. Such costs, or uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other intellectual property proceedings, could materially adversely affect our competitive advantage, business and results of operations.

We cannot predict the scope and extent of patent protection for our product candidates because the patent positions of pharmaceutical products are complex and uncertain.

Any patents issued to us will not ensure the protection of our intellectual property for a number of reasons, including, without limitation, the following:

We may not be able to enforce our intellectual property rights throughout the world. This risk is exacerbated because we expect that our product candidates will be manufactured and used in a number of countries.

The laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States. Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in certain foreign jurisdictions. This risk is exacerbated for us because we expect our product candidates will be manufactured and used in a number of countries.

The legal systems of some countries, particularly developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, especially those relating to life sciences. This could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our other intellectual property rights. For example, several foreign countries have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner must grant licenses to third parties. In addition, some countries limit the enforceability of patents against third parties, including government agencies or government contractors. In these countries, patents may provide limited or no benefit.

Although most jurisdictions in which we have applied for, intend to apply for, or have been issued patents have patent protection laws similar to those of the United States, some of them do not. For example, in the future, we may consider doing business in South America, Eurasia, China and Indochina, and the countries in these regions may not provide the same or similar protection as that provided in the United States. Additionally, due to uncertainty in patent protection law, we have not filed applications in many countries where significant markets exist, including, without limitation, South American countries, Eurasian countries, African countries and Taiwan.

Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business. Accordingly, our efforts to protect our intellectual property rights in such countries may be inadequate. In addition, changes in the law and legal decisions by courts in the United States and foreign countries may affect our ability to obtain adequate protection for our technology and the enforcement of intellectual property.

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

As is the case with other pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, our success is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries involve both technological and legal complexity. Therefore, obtaining and enforcing related patents is costly, time-consuming and inherently uncertain. In particular, the United States has recently enacted, and is currently implementing changes in the law, including wide-ranging patent reform legislation. The U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit have ruled on several patent cases in recent years, and could do so again in the future, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition, the USPTO has implemented patentability guidelines that may render the subject matter of a patent as non-patentable based on a lack of utility. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on decisions by applicable courts and legislatures in the countries in which we may pursue patent protection, including those of the U.S. Congress, the federal courts and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents and the interpretations of such laws could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future.

We may be unable to protect the intellectual property rights of the third parties from whom we license or may license certain of our intellectual property or with whom we have entered into other strategic relationships, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Certain of our intellectual property rights are and may in the future continue to be licensed from third parties, including universities and/or strategic partners. Such third parties may not protect the intellectual property rights that we license from them, and we may be unable to defend such intellectual property rights on our own (even if we contractually agree to manage, maintain and defend such rights) or we may have to undertake costly litigation to defend the intellectual property rights of such third parties. There can be no assurances that we will continue to have proprietary rights to any of the intellectual property that we license from such third parties or otherwise have the right to use through similar strategic relationships. Any loss or limitations on use with respect to such intellectual property licensed from third parties or otherwise obtained from third parties with whom we have entered into strategic relationships could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We may infringe on the intellectual property rights of others, which may prevent or delay our product development efforts and stop us from commercializing, or increase the costs of commercializing, our products.

Our commercial success depends significantly on our ability to operate without infringing the patents and other intellectual property rights of third parties. For example, there could be issued patents of which we are not aware that our products infringe. There also could be patents that we believe we do not infringe, but that we may ultimately be found to infringe. Moreover, patent applications are in some cases maintained in secrecy until patents are issued. The publication of discoveries in the scientific or patent literature frequently occurs substantially later than the date on which the underlying discoveries were made and patent applications were filed. Because patents can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending applications of which we are unaware that may later result in issued patents that our products infringe. For example, pending applications may exist that provide support or can be amended to provide support for a claim that results in an issued patent that our product infringes.

Third parties may assert that we are employing their proprietary technology without authorization. If a court held that any third-party patents are valid, enforceable and cover our products or their use, the holders of any of these patents may be able to block our ability to commercialize our product candidates or products unless we obtained a license under the applicable patents, or until the patents expire. In addition to litigation proceedings which may be filed against us, we may not be able to enter into licensing arrangements or make other arrangements at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms. Any inability to secure licenses or alternative technology could result in delays in the introduction of our products or lead to prohibition of the manufacture or sale of products by us.

We may be unable to adequately prevent disclosure and unauthorized use of trade secrets and other proprietary information by third parties.

Our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection and trade secret protection for our intellectual property and proprietary technologies, our products and their uses is important to our commercial success. We rely on a combination of patent, copyright, trademark and trade secret laws, non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements, licenses, assignment of inventions agreements and other restrictions on disclosure and use to protect our intellectual property rights.

We also rely on trade secrets to protect our proprietary know-how and technological advances, especially where we do not believe patent protection is appropriate or obtainable. However, trade secrets are difficult to protect. We rely in part on confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, outside scientific collaborators, sponsored researchers and other advisors to protect our trade secrets and other proprietary information. These agreements, to the extent they are in place and in effect, may not effectively prevent disclosure of confidential information and may not provide an adequate remedy in the event of unauthorized disclosure of confidential information. In addition, others may independently discover our trade secrets and proprietary information. Costly and time-consuming litigation could be necessary to enforce and determine the scope of our proprietary rights. Failure to obtain or maintain trade secret protection could enable competitors to use our proprietary information to develop products that compete with our product candidates or products or cause additional material adverse effects upon our competitive business position.

We cannot be certain that the steps that we have taken will prevent the misappropriation or other violation of our confidential information and other intellectual property, particularly in foreign countries in which laws may not protect our proprietary rights as fully as in the United States and other developed economies. Moreover, if we lose any key personnel, we may not be able to prevent these persons from impermissibly disclosing or using our technical knowledge or other trade secrets. If we are unable to maintain the security of our proprietary technology, this could materially adversely affect our competitive advantage, business and results of operations.

Under applicable U.S. and Israeli law, we may not be able to enforce covenants not to compete and therefore may be unable to prevent our competitors from benefiting from the expertise of some of our former employees.

We generally enter into non-competition agreements with our employees and certain key consultants, or our employment and consulting agreements contain non-competition provisions. These agreements, to the extent they are in place and in effect, prohibit our employees and certain key consultants, if they cease working for us, from competing directly with us or working for our competitors or clients for a limited period of time. 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 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 secrecy of a company’s confidential commercial information or the protection of its intellectual property. If we cannot demonstrate that such interests will be harmed, we may be unable to prevent our competitors from benefiting from the expertise of our former employees or consultants and our ability to remain competitive may be diminished.

Any lawsuits relating to infringement of intellectual property rights necessary to defend ourselves or enforce our rights will be costly and time consuming.

We may be required to initiate litigation to enforce our rights or defend our activities in response to alleged infringement of a third-party. In addition, we may be sued by others who hold intellectual property rights and who claim that their rights are infringed by our product candidates or any of our future products or product candidates. These lawsuits can be very time consuming and costly. There is a substantial amount of litigation involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries generally.

A third-party may claim that we are using inventions claimed by their patents and may go to court to stop us from engaging in our normal operations and activities, such as research, development and the sale of any future products. Such lawsuits are expensive and would consume time and other resources. There is a risk that such court will decide that we are infringing the third-party’s patents and will order us to stop the activities claimed by the patents, redesign our products or processes to avoid infringement or obtain licenses, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms. In addition, there is a risk that a court will order us to pay the other party damages for infringement.

Moreover, there is no guarantee that any prevailing patent owner would offer us a license so that we could continue to engage in activities claimed by the patent, or that such a license, if made available to us, could be acquired on commercially acceptable terms. In addition, third parties may, in the future, assert other intellectual property infringement claims against us with respect to our product candidates, technologies or other matters.

In addition, our patents and patent applications could face other challenges, such as interference proceedings, opposition proceedings and re-examination proceedings. Any of these challenges, if successful, could result in the invalidation of, or in a narrowing of the scope of, any of our patents and patent applications subject to challenge. Any of these challenges, regardless of their success, would likely be time consuming and expensive to defend and resolve and would divert our management’s time and attention.

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

The USPTO and various foreign governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other provisions during the patent process. There are situations in which non-compliance can result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. In such an event, competitors might be able to enter the market earlier than would otherwise have been the case.

Risks Related to the Ownership of Our Ordinary Shares

We do not know whether a market for our ordinary shares will be sustained or what the market price of our ordinary shares will be and as a result it may be difficult for you to sell your shares.

The trading price of our ordinary shares is likely to be volatile. The following factors, some of which are beyond our control, in addition to other risk factors described in this section, may have a significant impact on the market price of our ordinary shares:

These factors may materially and adversely affect the market price of our ordinary shares, which could result in substantial losses by our investors.

In addition, the stock market in general, and the Nasdaq Capital Market and the market for biotechnology companies in particular, have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of companies like ours. Broad market and industry factors may negatively affect the market price of our ordinary shares, regardless of our actual operating performance. Further, a systemic decline in the financial markets and related factors beyond our control may cause our share price to decline rapidly and unexpectedly. Price volatility of our ordinary shares might be worse if the trading volume of our ordinary shares is low.

Moreover, the liquidity of our ordinary shares is limited. Among other factors, the number of ordinary shares that can be bought and sold at a given price, potential delays in the timing of executing transactions in our ordinary shares and a reduction in security analyst and media coverage of our company, if any, may result in lower prices for our ordinary shares and a larger spread between the bid and ask prices therefor. In addition, without a large float, our ordinary shares are less liquid than the stock of companies with broader public ownership and, as a result, the trading prices of our ordinary shares may be more volatile. In the absence of an active public trading market, an investor may be unable to liquidate its investment in our ordinary shares. Trading of a relatively small volume of our ordinary shares may have a greater impact on the trading price of our shares than would be the case if our public float were larger. We cannot predict the prices at which our ordinary shares will trade in the future.

We may be subject to securities litigation, which may be expensive and could divert management attention.

Companies that have experienced volatility and other negative fluctuations in the market price of their stock have been subject to securities class action litigation. We may be the target of this type of litigation in the future. Litigation of this type could result in substantial costs and diversion of management’s attention and resources from our business, which could materially harm our business, even if we were to successfully defend against such litigation. Any adverse determination in litigation could also subject us to significant liabilities.

Our principal shareholders, directors and officers currently own approximately 14.09% of our outstanding ordinary shares. They will therefore be able to exert significant influence over matters submitted to our shareholders for approval.

Our principal shareholders, directors and officers beneficially own approximately 14.09% of our outstanding ordinary shares. As a result, these shareholders, if they acted together, could significantly influence matters requiring approval by our shareholders, including the election of directors and the approval of mergers or other business combination transactions. The interests of these shareholders may not always coincide with our interests or the interests of other shareholders.

Raising additional capital could result in dilution to our existing shareholders and may restrict our operations or require us to relinquish rights.

We may seek additional capital through a combination of private and public equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations and licensing arrangements. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity, convertible debt or other equity-linked securities, your ownership interest will be diluted, and the terms of the equity or equity-linked securities that we issue may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect your rights as a shareholder. Debt financing, if available, would result in increased payment obligations and may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures or declaring dividends. If we raise additional funds through collaboration, strategic alliance and licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our technologies, future revenue streams or product candidates, or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us.

Our U.S. shareholders may suffer adverse tax consequences if we were to be characterized as a passive foreign investment company, or PFIC.

Generally, if for any taxable year 75% or more of our gross income is passive income, or at least 50% of the average value of our assets are held for the production of, or produce, passive income, we would be characterized as a passive foreign investment company, or PFIC, for U.S. federal income tax purposes. There can be no assurance that we will not be classified as a PFIC in any year. If we were to be characterized as a PFIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes in any taxable year during which a U.S. Holder, as defined in “Taxation — United States Federal Income Tax Consequences,” owns ordinary shares, such U.S. Holder could face adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences (regardless of whether we continue to be characterized as a PFIC in subsequent years), including having gains realized on the sale of our ordinary shares classified as ordinary income, rather than as capital gains, and subject to tax at the highest marginal ordinary income tax rate, a loss of the preferential rate applicable to dividends received on our ordinary shares by individuals who are U.S. Holders, having interest charges apply to distributions by us and the proceeds of share sales, and additional reporting requirements. 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,” or QEF elections, if we are classified as a PFIC, and, accordingly, such elections would not be available to U.S. Holders. See “Taxation—United States Federal Income Tax Consequences.”

If securities or industry analysts do not publish or cease publishing research or reports about us, our business or our market, or if they adversely change their recommendations or publish negative reports regarding our business or our shares, our share price and trading volume could be negatively impacted.

The trading market for our ordinary shares may be influenced by the research and reports that industry or securities analysts may publish about us, our business, our market or our competitors. We do not have any control over these analysts, and we cannot provide any assurance that analysts will cover us or, if they do, provide favorable coverage. If any of the analysts who may cover us adversely change their recommendation regarding our shares, or provide more favorable relative recommendations about our competitors, our share price would likely decline. If any analyst who may cover us were to cease coverage of our company or fail to regularly publish reports on us, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which in turn could negatively impact our share price or trading volume.

Because we do not intend to declare cash dividends on our ordinary shares in the foreseeable future, shareholders must rely on appreciation of the value of our ordinary shares for any return on their investment.

We have never declared or paid cash dividends on our ordinary shares. We currently anticipate that we will retain future earnings, if any, for the development, operation and expansion of our business and do not anticipate declaring or paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. Moreover, the Israeli Companies Law, 1999 (the “Companies Law”), imposes certain restrictions on our ability to declare and pay dividends. Payment of dividends may also be subject to Israeli withholding taxes. See Item 10.E “Additional Information—Taxation—Israeli Taxation Considerations” for more information. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, of our ordinary shares will be your sole source of gain for the foreseeable future. Consequently, in the foreseeable future, you will likely only experience a gain from your investment in our ordinary shares if the price of our ordinary shares increases beyond the price in which you originally acquired the ordinary shares.

We are a “foreign private issuer” under the Exchange Act, and our disclosure and reporting requirements are different than those of a U.S. domestic reporting company.

We are a “foreign private issuer” under the Exchange Act and the rules of the SEC promulgated thereunder. As a result, we are subject to the reporting requirements under the Exchange Act applicable to foreign private issuers, meaning that, among other things, we are required to file our Annual Report on Form 20-F with the SEC within four months following our fiscal year end. In addition, we are not subject to quarterly financial reporting, as would be the case for a U.S. domestic reporting company; therefore, we are not required to file periodic reports and financial statements with the SEC as frequently or as promptly as U.S. companies whose securities are registered under the Exchange Act. We are additionally not required to comply with Regulation FD, which addresses certain restrictions on the selective disclosure of material non-public information. Also, our officers, directors and principal shareholders are exempt from the reporting and “short-swing” profit recovery provisions of Section 16 of the Exchange Act and the rules under the Exchange Act with respect to their purchases and sales of our ordinary shares. If we lose our status as a foreign private issuer, we will no longer be exempt from such rules and, among other things, will be required to file periodic reports and financial statements as if it were a company incorporated in the United States.

As a “foreign private issuer,” we are permitted to follow certain home country corporate governance practices instead of otherwise applicable Nasdaq Capital Market requirements, which may result in less protection than is accorded to investors under rules applicable to domestic U.S. issuers.

As a foreign private issuer, we are permitted to follow certain home country corporate governance practices instead of those otherwise required under the listing rules of the Nasdaq Capital Market (the “Nasdaq Listing Rules”) for U.S. issuers. For instance, we follow home country practice in Israel with regard to, among other things, director nomination procedures, quorum requirements, approval of compensation of officers and distribution of periodic reports. In addition, we follow our home country law instead of the Nasdaq Listing Rules that require that we obtain shareholder approval for certain dilutive events, such as the establishment or amendment of certain equity-based compensation plans, an issuance that will result in a change of control of the Company, the issuance of more than 20% of the equity in 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 Capital Market may provide less protection to you than what is accorded to investors under the Nasdaq Listing Rules applicable to domestic U.S. issuers.

Our ordinary shares are traded on more than one market, and this may result in price variations.

Our ordinary shares are traded on the Nasdaq Capital Market and the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange (“TASE”). Trading in our ordinary shares on these markets takes place in different currencies (U.S. dollars on Nasdaq and NIS on the TASE) and at different times, as a result of different time zones, trading days and public holidays in the United States and Israel. The trading prices of our ordinary shares on these two markets may differ due to these and other factors. Any decrease in the price of our ordinary shares on the TASE could contribute to a decrease in the trading price of our ordinary shares on Nasdaq, and a decrease in the price of our ordinary shares on Nasdaq could likewise contribute to a decrease in the trading price of our ordinary shares on the TASE.

Risks Related to Israeli Law and Our Operations in Israel

Our headquarters and other significant operations are located in Israel and, therefore, our business and operations may be adversely affected by political, economic and military instability in Israel.

Our executive offices are located in Ness Ziona, Israel. In addition, our officers and several of our directors are residents of Israel. Accordingly, political, economic and military conditions in Israel may directly affect our business and operations. Since the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, a number of armed conflicts have taken place between Israel and its neighboring countries. In recent years, Israel has been engaged in sporadic armed conflicts with Hamas, an Islamist terrorist group that controls the Gaza Strip, with Hezbollah, an Islamist terrorist group that controls large portions of southern Lebanon, and with Iranian-backed military forces in Syria.

In October 2023, Hamas terrorists infiltrated Israel’s southern border from the Gaza Strip and conducted a series of attacks on civilian and military targets. Hamas also launched extensive rocket attacks on Israeli population within the State of Israel. These attacks resulted in extensive deaths, injuries and kidnapping of civilians and soldiers. Following the attack, Israel’s security cabinet declared war against Hamas and commenced a military campaign against Hamas and these terrorist organizations in parallel continued rocket and terror attacks. Following the attack by Hamas on Israel’s southern border, Hezbollah in Lebanon also launched missile, rocket and shooting attacks against Israeli military sites, troops and Israeli towns in northern Israel. In response to these attacks, the Israeli army has carried out a number of targeted strikes on sites belonging to Hezbollah in southern Lebanon. Furthermore, following Hamas’ attack on Israel and Israel’s security cabinet declaration of war against Hamas, the Houthi movement, which controls parts of Yemen, launched a number of attacks on marine vessels traversing the Red Sea that were thought to either be on route to Israel or to be partly owned by Israeli businessmen. In April 2024, Iran launched a series of over 300 drone and missile attacks on military and civilian targets in Israel. Iran is widely believed to be developing nuclear weapons and is also believed to have a strong influence among extremist groups in the region, such as Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthi movement in Yemen and various rebel militia groups in Syria. It is possible that other terrorist organizations, including Palestinian military organizations in the West Bank, as well as other hostile countries, will join the hostilities. It is currently not possible to predict the duration or severity of the ongoing conflict or its effect on our business, operations and financial conditions. The ongoing conflict is rapidly evolving and developing, and could disrupt our business and operations.

In connection with the Israeli security cabinet’s declaration of war against Hamas in October 2023 and possible hostilities with other organizations, several hundred thousand Israeli military reservists were drafted to perform immediate military service. Certain of our employees in Israel have been called, and additional employees may be called, for service in the current or future wars or other armed conflicts with Hamas and others, and such persons may be absent for an extended period of time. While we have not been materially adversely impacted to date by any absences of our personnel, our operations could be disrupted by the absence of a significant number of our employees related to their, or their spouse’s, military service or the absence for extended periods of one or more of our key employees for military service, which disruption may materially and adversely affect our business 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. Although the Israeli government is currently committed to covering 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.

Further, in the past, the State of Israel and Israeli companies have been subjects of economic boycotts. Several countries still restrict business with the State of Israel and with Israeli companies. These restrictive laws and policies may have an adverse impact on our operating results, financial condition or the expansion of our business. A campaign of boycotts, divestment, and sanctions has been undertaken against Israel, which could also adversely affect our business. Parties with whom we do business have sometimes declined to travel to Israel during periods of heightened unrest or tension, and airline companies may cancel or delay scheduled air travel to Israel, forcing us to make alternative arrangements when necessary in order to meet our business partners face to face. In addition, the political and security situation in Israel may result in parties with whom we have agreements involving performance in Israel claiming that they are not obligated to perform their commitments under those agreements pursuant to force majeure provisions in such agreements. Any hostilities involving Israel or the interruption or curtailment of trade between Israel and its trading partners could adversely affect our operations and make it more difficult for us to do business and raise capital.

Finally, political conditions within Israel may affect our operations. Israel has held five general elections between 2019 and 2022, and prior to October 2023, the Israeli government pursued extensive changes to Israel’s judicial system, which sparked extensive political debate and unrest. To date, these initiatives have been substantially put on hold. Actual or perceived political instability in Israel or any negative changes in the political environment, may individually or in the aggregate adversely affect the Israeli economy and, in turn, our business, financial condition, results of operations, growth prospects, and share price as well as our ability to raise additional funds.

Exchange rate fluctuations between the U.S. dollar, Euro and the NIS may negatively affect our earnings.

Our functional currency is the U.S. dollar because the U.S. dollar is the currency of the primary economic environment in which we operate and expect to continue to operate for the foreseeable future. The functional currency of Enlivex Therapeutics R&D. Ltd., our wholly owned subsidiary formed under the laws of the State of Israel (“Enlivex R&D”) had been the NIS; however, we reassessed Enlivex R&D’s functional currency and determined that, as of September 30, 2021, the U.S. dollar became the functional currency of Enlivex R&D rather than the NIS. Monetary assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies are translated into U.S. dollars using exchange rates in effect at the applicable balance sheet date. Because we incur expenses denominated in currencies other than the U.S. dollar, predominantly the NIS and Euro, fluctuations in exchange rates among these currencies may negatively impact our earnings, particularly if the NIS or Euro appreciates against the U.S. dollar. The average exchange rate for the year ended December 31, 2023 was $1.00 = Euro 0.94 and $1.00 = NIS 3.627.

Enlivex R&D, our primary operating subsidiary, received Israeli government grants for certain of our research and development activities. The terms of those grants may require us, in addition to payment of royalties, to satisfy specified conditions in order to manufacture products and transfer technologies outside of Israel. We may be required to pay penalties in addition to repayment of the grants.

The research and development efforts of our primary operating subsidiary, Enlivex R&D, have been financed in part through royalty-bearing grants, in the aggregate amount of approximately $8.0 million, from the Israel Innovation Authority (the “IIA”), pursuant to the Encouragement of Research, Development and Technological Innovation in the Industry Law 5744-1984 (formerly known as the Encouragement of Industrial Research and Development Law, 5744-1984), (the “Innovation Law”). As of December 31, 2023, we have not paid any royalties to the IIA and had a contingent obligation to the IIA, including interest, of $9.6 million.

Under the Innovation Law as currently in effect, we are committed to pay royalties at a rate of 3% to 5% on our sales proceeds from any products or services based on know-how funded by the IIA research and development grants Enlivex R&D received (which rates may be increased under certain circumstances) up to the total amount of grants received (which may be increased under certain circumstances), linked to the U.S. dollar and bearing interest. Until October 25, 2023, the interest was calculated at a rate based on the last published 12-month LIBOR applicable to U.S. dollar deposits. On October 25, 2023, the IIA published a directive concerning changes in royalties to address the expiration of the LIBOR, according to which, (a) for IIA grants approved between January 1, 1999 and June 30, 2017 – the annual interest will be the interest in effect at the time of the grant approval; (b) for IIA grants approved between July 1, 2017 and December 31, 2023 – for the period prior to December 31, 2023, the interest shall be calculated based on the 12-month LIBOR applicable to U.S. dollar deposits, as published on the first trading day of each year or in an alternative publication of the Bank of Israel; and for periods as of January 1, 2024, the annual interest shall be calculated at a rate based on the 12-month secured overnight financing rate (“SOFR”), or at an alternative rate published by the Bank of Israel plus 0.71513%; and (c) for IIA grants approved on or following January 1, 2024, the annual interest shall be the higher of (i) the 12 months SOFR interest rate, plus 1%, and (ii) a fixed annual interest rate of 4%.

Regardless of any royalty payment, we are required to comply with the requirements of Innovation Law with respect to those past grants. The terms of such IIA grants and the Innovation Law restrict the transfer of IIA-funded know-how and rights related thereto, technology and products to a third party or the transfer of manufacturing or manufacturing rights of the same outside of Israel (except for the transfer of up to 10% of the manufacturing capacity in the aggregate which requires only a notice to the IIA), without the prior IIA approval. Therefore, if deemed IIA-funded, the discretionary approval of an IIA committee would be required for any such transfer to third parties outside of Israel, which could, if we receive such approvals, result in the payment of increased royalties (both increased royalty rates and increased royalties ceilings) in cases of transfer of manufacturing outside of Israel (up to one and a half times the amount of the IIA grants received, depending on the manufacturing volume performed outside Israel, plus accrued interest) and/or payment of additional amounts to the IIA in cases of transfer of IIA-funded know-how outside of Israel (calculated according to a formula under the Innovation Law, which may be in the amount of up to six times the amount of the grants received (less paid royalties, if any, and depreciation, but no less than the total grants received), plus accrued interest).

These restrictions and requirements for payment may impair our ability to sell our IIA funded technology assets outside of Israel or to outsource or transfer development or manufacturing activities with respect to any such product or technology outside of Israel. Furthermore, the consideration available to our shareholders in a transaction involving the transfer outside of Israel of IIA-funded know-how, technology or products (such as a merger or similar transaction) may be reduced by any amounts that we may be required to pay to the IIA.

Our obligations and limitations pursuant to the Innovation Law are not limited in time and may not be terminated by us at will and remain in force even after we have paid all required royalties. Such restrictions and payments could materially restrict or limit our ability to perform or outsource manufacturing outside of Israel or otherwise transfer or license our IIA-supported know-how, technology or products, which could materially affect our business, results of operations and financial position.

Provisions of Israeli law and our Amended and Restated Articles of Association may delay, prevent or otherwise impede a merger with, or an acquisition of, our company, which could prevent a change of control, even when the terms of such a transaction are favorable to us and our shareholders.

Provisions of Israeli law and our Amended and Restated Articles of Association could have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control and may make it more difficult for a third-party to acquire us or our shareholders to elect different individuals to our Board of Directors, even if doing so would be considered to be beneficial by some of our shareholders, and may limit the price that investors may be willing to pay in the future for our ordinary shares. Among other things, 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 merger may not be consummated unless at least 50 days have passed from the date on which a merger proposal is filed by each merging company with the Israel Registrar of Companies and at least 30 days have passed from the date on which the shareholders of both merging companies have approved the merger. In addition, a majority of each class of securities of the target company must approve a merger. Moreover, 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.

Further, 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 fulfilment of numerous conditions, including a holding period of two years from the date of the transaction during which sales and dispositions of shares of the participating companies are restricted. 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 actual disposition of the shares has occurred.

In addition, our Amended and Restated Articles of Association do not provide for cumulative voting in the election of directors, which limits the ability of minority shareholders to elect director candidates, and provide that director vacancies may be filled by our Board of Directors, which may prevent shareholders from being able to fill vacancies on our Board of Directors.

It may be difficult to enforce a judgment of a United States court against us, our officers and directors in Israel or the United States, to assert United States securities laws claims in Israel or to serve process on our officers and directors.

We are organized in Israel. Substantially all of our executive officers and directors reside outside of the United States, and all of our assets 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 necessarily 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.

Your rights, liabilities and responsibilities as a shareholder will be governed by Israeli law and will differ in some material respects from those under U.S. law.

Because we are an Israeli company, the rights and responsibilities of our shareholders are governed by our Amended and Restated Articles of Association and Israeli law, including the Companies Law. These rights, liabilities and responsibilities differ in some material respects from the rights, liabilities and responsibilities of shareholders in a U.S. corporation. 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 his, her or its power in the company, including, among other things, in voting at the general meeting of shareholders on certain matters. Israeli law provides that these duties are applicable to shareholder votes on, among other things, amendments to a company’s articles of association, increases in a company’s authorized share capital, mergers and interested party transactions requiring shareholder approval under Israeli law. In addition, a controlling shareholder of an Israeli company or a shareholder who is aware that it possesses the power to determine the outcome of a shareholders’ vote or to appoint or prevent the appointment of a director or executive officer in the company or has other powers towards the company, has a duty of fairness towards the company. However, Israeli law does not define the substance of this duty of fairness. There is limited case law available to assist us in understanding the implications of these provisions that govern shareholders’ actions. These provisions may be interpreted to impose additional obligations and liabilities on holders of our ordinary shares that are not typically imposed on shareholders of U.S. corporations.

ITEM 4. INFORMATION ON THE COMPANY

4.A. History and Development

We were originally incorporated on January 22, 2012 under the laws of the State of Israel as Bioblast Pharma Ltd. (“Bioblast”). On March 26, 2019, Bioblast and Enlivex R&D (formerly known as Enlivex Therapeutics Ltd.) consummated a merger transaction whereby Enlivex R&D merged with a wholly owned subsidiary of Bioblast, with Enlivex R&D as the surviving entity in the merger (the “Merger”). As a result of the Merger, Enlivex R&D became a wholly owned subsidiary of Bioblast. In connection with the consummation of the Merger, Bioblast changed its name from “Bioblast Pharma Ltd.” to “Enlivex Therapeutics Ltd.”

Our primary operating subsidiary, Enlivex R&D, was originally incorporated in September 2005 under the laws of the State of Israel under the name Tolarex Ltd. In February 2010, Enlivex R&D changed its to Enlivex Therapeutics Ltd., and upon consummation of the Merger, to Enlivex Therapeutics R&D Ltd. In June 2021 Enlivex Therapeutics RDO Ltd. was established in Israel as a wholly owned subsidiary. Our principal executive offices are located at 14 Einstein Street, Ness Ziona, Israel 7403618 and our telephone number is: +972 26208072. Our wholly owned U.S. subsidiary, Enlivex Therapeutics Inc., incorporated in Delaware, has been appointed our agent in the United States, and its registered address is 1811 Silverside Road, Wilmington, Delaware 19810. Our website address is https://www.enlivex.com. The information contained on, or that can be accessed through, our website is not part of this Annual Report on Form 20-F. We have included our website address herein solely as an inactive textual reference. The SEC also maintains a website that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information regarding registrants that file electronically with the SEC. The address of this website is http://www.sec.gov.

Our capital expenditures for the three years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021 were insignificant. See “Operating and Financial Review and Prospects—Liquidity and Capital Resources.”

4.B. Business Overview

Overview

The Company is a clinical-stage macrophage reprogramming immunotherapy company, developing Allocetra^TM, a universal, off-the-shelf cell therapy designed to reprogram macrophages into their homeostatic state. Resetting non-homeostatic macrophages into their homeostatic state is critical for immune system rebalancing and resolution of debilitating and life-threatening conditions. Non-homeostatic macrophages contribute significantly to the severity of the respective diseases. By restoring macrophage homeostasis, Allocetra™ has the potential to provide a novel immunotherapeutic mechanism of action for debilitating and life-threatening clinical indications that are defined as “unmet medical needs,” as a stand-alone therapy or in combination with leading therapeutic agents.

Macrophages are tissue-resident or infiltrating immune cells critical for innate immunity, normal tissue development, and repair of damaged tissue. Macrophages’ function is a result of their original designation, their local micro-environment, and the type of metabolites, substances or pathogens to which they are exposed. Reprogrammed out of their homeostatic state, macrophages contribute to the pathophysiology of multiple inflammatory diseases, including sepsis, osteoarthritis and various inflammatory disorders.

We believe the Company’s primary innovative immunotherapy, Allocetra^TM, represents a paradigm shift in macrophage reprogramming, moving from targeting a specific subset of macrophages or a specific pathway effecting macrophages activity, to a fundamental view of macrophage homeostasis. Restoring macrophage homeostasis may induce the immune system to rebalance itself to normal levels of operation, thereby promoting disease resolution.

The Company is focused on two clinical program verticals as its main inflammatory and autoimmune indications: sepsis and osteoarthritis (the “Indications”). Additionally, the Company is seeking external collaborations or out-licensing opportunities for the development of Allocetra™ as a next-generation solid cancer immunotherapy. The Company believes that negatively-reprogrammed macrophages may be key contributors to disease severity across the Indications, and thus effective reprogramming of these negative-reprogrammed macrophages into their respective homeostatic states may facilitate disease resolution to these Indications, some of which are considered “unmet medical needs.” All planned and expected timelines for execution of the clinical trials in the Indications are subject to certain risks and uncertainties. For further discussion of risks and uncertainties related to our clinical trial in the Indications please see Item 3.D. “Risk Factors” above.

Strategic Reprioritization Plan

In September 2023, we announced a strategic reprioritization plan, pursuant to which we determined to increase our existing focus on inflammatory and autoimmune indications. As part of the strategic reprioritization plan, in addition to the ongoing Phase II trial of Allocetra^TM in patients with sepsis, the Company initiated a clinical program in osteoarthritis, which is a degenerative disease with low grade inflammation and an indication with a substantial unmet medical need that potentially represents a multibillion commercial market. Within the osteoarthritis program, the Company announced the dosing of the first patient in a Phase I/II investigator-initiated clinical trial enrolling patients with severe knee osteoarthritis who had been indicated for knee replacement surgeries and are offered to inject Allocetra^TM locally into the diseased knee as a potential alternative for pain resolution and knee functionality in lieu of replacement surgery. In addition to this Phase I/II trial, following receipt of the approval of the IMOH in January 2024, we initiated a Company-sponsored multi-country, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled Phase I/II trial to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of Allocetra™ following injections into the target knee joint of up to 160 moderately to severely symptomatic osteoarthritis patients. In April 2024, we announced that the Danish Medicines Agency authorized the expansion of this trial into Denmark, as well as the dosing of the first two patients in the trial. This Phase I/II multi-center trial is composed of two stages. The first stage is a safety run-in, open-label dose escalation phase to characterize the safety and tolerability of Allocetra™ injections to the target knee in order to identify the dose and injection regimen for the second, randomized stage. The second stage is a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled stage, which we expect to initiate following the completion of the safety run-in stage and confirmation by the safety and tolerability independent Data and Safety Monitoring Board. In addition to evaluating safety, the blinded randomized stage is statistically-powered to assess the efficacy of Allocetra™ injections into the knee. We expect that the primary measurements will evaluate joint-pain and joint-function compared to placebo at three months, six months and 12 months. We are targeting to receive the topline readout from the randomized stage of the study by the third quarter of 2025 and from the Phase I/II investigator-initiated clinical trial in 12 patients with severe knee osteoarthritis who had been indicated for knee replacement surgeries by the end of the third quarter of 2024.

Pursuant to the strategic reprioritization plan, and in light of the new guidelines and regulatory initiatives set by the FDA for drug development in oncology, which may result in longer clinical development cycles as foundations for regulatory approvals, the Company ceased the internal clinical development of its various oncology indications and plans to seek external collaborations or out-licensing opportunities for the development of Allocetra™ as a next-generation solid cancer immunotherapy.

As a result of the Company’s reprioritization of its clinical indications and focus on the inflammatory and auto-immune verticals, the Company reduced its workforce by approximately 50%. The workforce reductions and the savings associated with the reclassification of the oncology indications as candidates for external collaborations or out-licensing opportunities in lieu of internal development are expected to result in a substantial extension of the Company’s cash runway through the end of 2025. The revised, extended cash runway is expected to support the timeline for the topline data readouts of the end-stage knee osteoarthritis Phase I/II trial as well as the randomized, controlled Phase II clinical trial in osteoarthritis.

Macrophage Reprogramming

When macrophages are reprogrammed by certain diseases, they may become non-homeostatic hyper-activated, pro-inflammatory or highly passive, depending on the disease and the environment in which they reside. In their aggressive modality, macrophages can cause a systemic inflammatory response in which cytokine release composition and amplitude spirals out of control. In addition, macrophages are dynamic cells with critical roles in the induction and resolution of sterile inflammation (such as inflammation that is not due to infection but rather a result of trauma, injury or other conditions) and are a fundamental characteristic in chronic inflammation. Macrophages are one of the principal drivers of both inflammation and chronicity in joint arthritis where an imbalance between hyper-inflammatory macrophages and pro-resolution macrophages plays a pivotal role in the development of inflammation and disease pathophysiology.

Cytokines are a broad and loose category of small proteins (~5–20 kDa) produced by a broad range of cells, including immune cells, and are especially important in the immune system as they promote, modulate and balance immune responses. They are released by cells and affect the behavior of other cells, and include chemokines, interferons, interleukins, lymphokines, tumor necrosis factors and others, but generally not hormones or growth factors. Cytokines are important in health and disease, specifically in host responses to infection, immune responses, inflammation, trauma, sepsis, cancer and other conditions. Cytokine Release Syndrome is a systemic inflammatory response in which cytokine release composition and amplitude spirals out of control. It is considered difficult to treat with traditional small molecules or biologics because the condition involves dozens of cytokines that induce multiple biological paths of hyper immune activity. Such hyper immune activity may result in an attack of immune killer cells (e.g., T-Cells, B-Cells and Natural Killer Cells) on healthy organs of the patient, including the heart, brain, lungs, liver, kidney and others, which may lead to organ damage, multiple organ failure and mortality.

The Company believes that the only approach to handling such a multi-factorial complex situation in diseases in which one key aspect of disease severity is the negative reprogramming of macrophages is via an integrated cell-based immunotherapy that positively reprograms macrophages back into their respective homeostatic state, thereby inducing the immune system to rebalance itself to macrophage-modulated proper immune responses to disease challenges. The Company’s unique therapeutic approach is based on inducing macrophage homeostasis by infusing Allocetra^TM into the patient. Once infused, the Allocetra^TM cells interact with macrophages and dendritic cells via well-defined mechanisms causing a reprogramming of these negatively reprogrammed macrophages back to their homeostatic state. Using this inherent immune pathway, the Company believes that it can use Allocetra™ to shape a patient’s innate immune response to a disease.

Sepsis

The Company is developing Allocetra™ as an adjunctive immunomodulating cell therapy for avoiding organ failure caused by sepsis. The drug would be administered intravenously to the patient following the diagnosis of sepsis in addition to standard of care treatment.

Sepsis is a highly heterogeneous syndrome that is caused by an unbalanced immune host response to an infection. Sepsis was not clinically defined until the early 1990s when a group of key opinion leaders released the first consensus definition of sepsis. Sepsis has been defined as a systemic inflammatory response syndrome (“SIRS”) caused by an infection; and increasing severities have been designated as ‘severe sepsis’ (referring to sepsis and organ dysfunction) and ‘septic shock’ (referring to sepsis and refractory hypotension). In the most recent ‘Sepsis-3’ consensus definition, sepsis is defined as a life-threatening organ dysfunction that is caused by a dysregulated host response to infection, and the term “severe sepsis” has been removed. Of note, although infection is the triggering event in this definition of sepsis, the aberrant immune response often remains after successful treatment of the infection, reflected by a cytokine storm, a severe immune reaction in which the body releases too many cytokines into the blood too quickly, and which is a common mechanism driving the severity of the clinical condition of sepsis patients. Sepsis imposes a substantial global burden in terms of morbidity and mortality. Nearly all patients with severe sepsis require treatment in an intensive care unit. Sepsis, which has been identified by the World Health Organization as a global health priority, has no proven pharmacologic treatment other than appropriate antibiotic agents, fluids, and vasopressors. According to the CDC, at least 1.7 million adults in the United States develop sepsis each year, with approximately 270,000 dying of the disease. Among all sepsis cases, up to an estimated 31% are urosepsis, representing up to 9.8 million cases and up to 1.6 million deaths annually worldwide (G. Bonkat et. al; 2018). Various studies estimate that sepsis is present in 30% to 50% of hospitalizations that culminate in death (Rhee et al; 2019) Previous attempts to find a therapy for sepsis failed partially due to the parallel and complex course of biological activities that occur within a sepsis patient. For many years, a disproportionate inflammatory response to invasive infection was considered to be central to the pathogenesis of sepsis, but it is now clear that the host response is disturbed in a much more complex way, involving both sustained excessive inflammation and immune suppression, and a failure to return to normal homeostasis.

This outcome may lead to organ damage, multiple organ failure and mortality. If the immune system could be rebalanced, we believe that many of the outcomes, specifically organ damage and failure, could be prevented and significantly increase a patient’s chance of survival with reduced morbidity.

Preclinical Data, Sepsis

In its preclinical study, the Company utilized a murine cecal ligation puncture (“CLP”) sepsis model. The CLP model has been proposed to more closely replicate the nature and course of clinical sepsis, as compared to other models.

We evaluated the effect of Allocetra™ in mice, given 4 hours after the end of a CLP procedure, in combination with Ertapenem© a highly effective antibiotic commonly used for the treatment of severe or high-risk bacterial infections. Mice were monitored for clinical signs and determination of the murine sepsis score. The endpoint was defined as survival (either death or sacrifice when a total clinical score of 15 or maximum score in one of the categories was reached).

As shown in Figure 1A, antibiotic treatment showed a non-significant tendency to ameliorate mortality of the mice (Ertapenem + vehicle, n=15) compared to the control group (CLP only, n=16). Treating CLP mice with the combination of antibiotics and Allocetra™ significantly delayed and prevented mortality in 60% of the animals (Ertapenem + Allocetra™, n=20, p<0.001). In comparison to the control group, the Company’s study reflected an approximately 10-fold improvement in the survival rate (p<0.001 in a log-rank analysis). As shown in Figure 1B, Allocetra™ treated mice had significantly lower murine sepsis clinical scores indicating superior clinical condition. Finally, the Company correlated the clinical score to serum cytokines/chemokines in vivo measurements and as shown in Figure 1C. Allocetra™ downregulated pro-inflammatory cytokines/chemokines. In the preclinical study, Allocetra™ delayed and prevented mortality in animal models with sepsis by rebalancing the immune system.

Figure 1A

Figure 1B

Figure 1C

Allocetra™ for the Treatment of Organ Dysfunction and Failure Associated with Sepsis

In late 2019, the Company completed its Phase Ib clinical trial of Allocetra™ in patients with severe sepsis. The Company has designed Allocetra™ to eliminate the need to find matched donors as the source of the therapeutic cells. Following regulatory approval, if obtained, the Company could manufacture Allocetra™ product inventory that could be used for additional clinical indications that require swift infusion of the product to patients. The first such indication Enlivex is targeting is prevention of cytokine storms and organ dysfunction associated with sepsis.

The aim of the Phase Ib clinical trial was to determine the safety and efficacy profile and tolerability of Allocetra™, in subjects admitted to the emergency room with sepsis. Allocetra™ (140x10⁶ cells/kg) was administered in either a single dose to 6 patients at day 1 or in two doses to 4 additional patients at days 1 and 3, to patients admitted to the emergency room with sepsis. Patients were followed for 28 days. The study subjects were also compared to historical controls hospitalized in the intensive care unit (“ICU”), matched by age, gender, SOFA score, and infection source.

On March 18, 2020, the Company announced the final safety and efficacy data from the Company’s completed Phase Ib. The final analysis compared the clinical data of 10 patients admitted to the ICU with sepsis who were administered Allocetra™ upon their admission, with 37 patients who were matched controls (matched by age, gender, SOFA score, and infection source) who received only the standard of care treatment at the same hospital during 2014-2019 but did not receive Allocetra™. The clinical trial was conducted at Hadassah Medical Center, which is one of the largest and most prestigious hospitals in Israel. The Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHEII) score of the Allocetra™-treated group was 12.9, and the corresponding probability of mortality of at least one patient in that group was predicted at 85% based on the hospital’s ICU staff’s clinical assessment of each patient’s overall condition at admission. However, none (0%) of the Allocetra™-treated patients died during the 28-day study period, as compared to 27% 28-day mortality in the matched controls group. Each of the 10 Allocetra™-treated patients had between 2 to 5 dysfunctional organ systems upon admission to the ICU. All (100%) of the Allocetra™-treated patients had rapid and complete recovery from their septic conditions and of any organ dysfunction that was present upon admission to the ICU. Despite the similarity of SOFA scores at entry between the Allocetra™-treated patients and the matched controls group (average of 3.4 versus 3.47), not a single patient treated with Allocetra™ had any increase in organ-failure state post administration of Allocetra™, while the majority of the patients in the matched controls group had an increase in organ-failure state. The average worsening in organ-failure state of patients in the matched controls group was approximately 100% compared with their ICU hospitalization state vs zero (0%) percent worsening in organ-failure state of Allocetra™-treated patients post administration of Allocetra™ (p< <0.0001). The ICU length-of-stay for all Allocetra™-treated patients was significantly shorter than those patients who received only the standard of care, with an average of 4.7 days compared to 11.11 in the matched controls group, a 64% reduction (p<0.0001). The slowest ICU discharge of a patient treated with Allocetra™ was after 8 days, while approximately 50% of the matched controls group were still at the ICU after 28 days. Allocetra™ was shown to be safe and tolerable, with no serious unexpected severe adverse reactions and no serious adverse events.

Figures 2A - B present our Phase Ib trial results for evaluating Allocetra™ in patients with sepsis.

Figure 2A

Figure 2B

In 2021, we initiated a placebo-controlled, randomized, dose-finding, multi-center, Phase II trial evaluating liquid Allocetra in patients with pneumonia-associated sepsis. During 2022, the Company amended the protocol of this clinical trial to treat newly recruited patients with frozen formulation Allocetra™ and expand the study population to include patients whose septic condition stems from biliary, urinary tract or peritoneal infections. An additional amendment to the study protocol was filed in the second quarter of 2023 to include an increase in the patients’ SOFA score range, effectively allowing recruitment of patients with higher levels of sepsis severity, and a change to two cohorts (treatment and placebo) in lieu of the four-cohort structure previously contemplated. The first patient was dosed under the amended protocol during the second quarter of 2023 and in December 2023, the Company completed enrollment of all 120 patients in the trial.

Figure 2C presents the details of the Phase II clinical trial’s design.

Figure 2C

In April 2024, we announced the 28 days topline data from the Phase II trial evaluating Allocetra™ in patients with sepsis. Stand-alone analysis² of the Allocetra™-treated patients, of which 78% had septic shock and 58% had invasive ventilation at screening, demonstrated substantial reductions in SOFA scores and 65% reduction in overall mortality rate as compared with expected mortality based on real-world data and recent clinical sizeable studies in sepsis. By day 28, the analysis showed 90% reductions of SOFA scores for sepsis patients whose infection source was urinary tract, 68% for patients whose infection source was community-acquired pneumonia, and 36% for patients whose infection source was an internal abdominal infection. Relative analysis demonstrates a potential indication of effect of Allocetra™ as compared with placebo, in high-risk severe sepsis patient population, originating from urinary tract infections (“High-Risk UTI”). Up to an estimated 31% of sepsis cases start as urinary tract infections, representing up to 9.8 million cases and up to 1.6 million deaths annually worldwide (G. Bonkat et. al. 2018), which represents a substantial potential market opportunity for Allocetra™. We intend to consider a potential follow-on, randomized, controlled study of a solely High-Risk UTI sepsis population upon reviewing the totality of the data.

Figures 2D - F provide a more detailed presentation of the Allocetra^TM Phase II 28 days topline data results.

Figure 2D

Figure 2E

Figure 2F

The study was designed for patients to be randomized with equal degree of SOFA scores across treatment and placebo groups. The randomization resulted in the Allocetra™-treated cohorts having 20% higher frequency of septic shock and 35% higher frequency of invasive ventilation prior to treatment, as compared with the control group. Both of these patient attributes are associated with a significantly higher degree of difficulty of treatment and higher mortality rates. These imbalances made it challenging to deduce the relative effect in other patient subgroups.

Figure 2G provides further detail on the imbalances between the control and Allocetra™-treated cohorts.

Figure 2G

Finally, stand-alone and placebo-compared analysis across all sepsis patient subgroups and risk categories demonstrated acceptable safety and tolerability profile of Allocetra™ IV infusions, as set forth in more detail in Figure 2H.

Figure 2H

Osteoarthritis

Since our inception, we have considered the inherent properties of Allocetra^TM as an innovative, highly differentiated modality for immune resolution across a wide variety of inflammatory and auto-immune indications with unmet medical needs that have received strong interest from large pharma, physicians and patients. As part of our strategic reprioritization plan announced in September 2023, we initiated a clinical program in osteoarthritis, which is a degenerative disease with low grade inflammation and an indication with a substantial unmet medical need that potentially represents a multibillion commercial market. The pathogenesis of osteoarthritis can affect the entire joint, including cartilage, synovial tissue, subchondral bone, and the joint capsule, as well as inflammation of the synovium. Low-grade synovial inflammation has been observed in most osteoarthritis patients at both the early and late stages of the disease. The inflammatory factors and mediators have long been known to play a role in the breakdown of the cartilage extracellular matrix (ECM) and cartilage damage. Osteoarthritis synovium contains elevated levels of immune cells with activated macrophages being the major ones. Pro-inflammatory macrophages release a broad spectrum of inflammatory and immune mediators into the synovial cavity, contributing to chronic inflammatory condition, cartilage loss and bone alteration. As pro-inflammatory macrophages play a crucial role in orchestrating other cells in the initiation of osteoarthritis immunopathogenesis and the low-grade chronic inflammation, reprogramming them into pre-resolution macrophages is considered an emerging target for osteoarthritis treatment. We believe that Allocetra^TM, which targets macrophages and macrophage-associated inflammatory pathways, may be a promising therapeutic strategy in the treatment of osteoarthritis.

During the third quarter of 2023, we announced the dosing of the first patient in a Phase I/II investigator-initiated clinical trial of patients with end-stage knee osteoarthritis who had been indicated for knee replacement surgeries. Patients are offered Allocetra^TM to assess the safety of an injection to the knee as a potential alternative for pain resolution and knee functionality in lieu of knee replacement surgery. The study is expected to enroll 12 patients who will be administered with a single injection of Allocetra^TM with a follow up at 12 months.

In addition to this Phase I/II trial, following receipt of the approval of the IMOH in January 2024, we initiated a multi-country randomized, controlled Phase I/II clinical trial evaluating Allocetra^TM in patients with moderate knee osteoarthritis in early 2024. In April 2024, we announced that the Danish Medicines Agency authorized the expansion of this trial into Denmark, as well as the dosing of the first two patients in the trial. The Phase I/II clinical trial is a double-blinded, placebo-controlled randomized trial, which is statistically-powered to evaluate efficacy, safety and tolerability of Allocetra™ following injections into the target knee joint of up to 160 moderately to severely symptomatic osteoarthritis patients. This Phase I/II multi-center trial is composed of two stages. The first stage is a safety run-in, open-label dose escalation phase to characterize the safety and tolerability of Allocetra^TM injections to the target knee in order to identify the dose and injection regimen for the second, randomized stage. The second stage is a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled stage, which we expect to initiate following the completion of the safety run-in stage and confirmation by the safety and tolerability independent Data and Safety Monitoring Board. In addition to evaluating safety, the blinded randomized stage is statistically-powered to assess the efficacy of Allocetra™ injections into the knee. We expect that the primary measurements will evaluate joint-pain and joint-function compared to placebo at three months, six months and 12 months following treatment.

The initiation of the clinical program in osteoarthritis followed preclinical evidence of the potential applicability of Allocetra’s^TM mechanism of action to resolve chronic low grade inflammation of joints with osteoarthritis, as well as a substantial recovery in a case of a 70-year old patient who suffered for many years from vanishing bone disease (Gorham-Stout syndrome), which is a rare disease characterized by destruction of osseous matrix and proliferation of vascular structures, resulting in complete destruction and absorption of the patient’s shoulder joint. Despite exhaustive therapeutic attempts, the patient’s disease remained refractory to treatment and continued to deteriorate, with continuous production of synovial fluid, necessitating permanent drainage of the shoulder and, as a consequence, requiring extended hospitalization for a duration of nine months prior to compassionate treatment with Allocetra^TM to the shoulder joint. Following five intra-articular Allocetra^TM injections, substantial improvement was documented in multiple clinical parameters, including pain and inflammatory cytokines, and the patient was successfully discharged from the hospital. At a two-year follow-up, the improvement in the afflicted shoulder was maintained and no subsequent hospital re-admissions were required.

We are targeting obtaining a targeted topline data readout for its randomized, controlled Phase I/II trial in up to 160 patients with moderate knee osteoarthritis by the third quarter of 2025; and a targeted topline data readout from the Phase I/II investigator-initiated clinical trial in 12 patients with severe knee osteoarthritis who had been indicated for knee replacement surgeries by the end of the third quarter of 2024.

Accelerated Regulatory Approval Processes for Life Saving Therapies

We anticipate that our therapeutic drugs and their respective indications could qualify under specific accelerated regulatory paths in both the EU and the United States. Specifically for the EU, an accelerated path allowing conditional marketing approval is available for certain therapeutic drugs following a Phase II study. There is no assurance that we will qualify for such accelerated regulatory paths.

Competition

The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries are characterized by rapidly evolving technology, intense competition and a highly uncertain, costly and lengthy research and development process. Adequate protection of intellectual property, successful product development, adequate funding and retention of skilled, experienced and professional personnel are among the many factors critical to success in these industries.

We believe that our product candidate offers key potential advantages over other drugs and therapies currently in use or in development that could enable our product candidate, if approved for the intended indications, to capture meaningful market share.

See “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Business, Industry and Regulatory Requirements—It is possible that none of our product candidates will achieve commercial success in a timely and cost-effective manner, or ever” and “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Business, Industry and Regulatory Requirements—Our market is subject to intense competition. If we are unable to compete effectively, Allocetra™ or any other product candidate that we may develop may be rendered uncompetitive or obsolete.”

License Agreements

Tolaren Ltd.

In April 2008, Tolaren Ltd., which we refer to as Tolaren, granted to us an exclusive, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty free and sublicensable license to research, develop, commercialize, manufacture, market, sell, distribute and otherwise use and exploit a certain patent, patent rights and pending patent applications relating to the method for using apoptotic cells as a treatment for various autoimmune and inflammatory disorders and the production processes with respect to the same. The license further stipulates that all intellectual property rights, including, any inventions, developments, discoveries, results, products data, information and know-how developed by the Company based on the licensed intellectual property rights, belong solely and exclusively to the Company and, to the extent such intellectual property rights are registrable, they may be registered in the name of the Company. We have used and continue to use such licensed technology to develop and produce Allocetra™. Pursuant to the license, we have agreed to manage, maintain and defend the licensed patents, including managing the registration of such patents in different countries. The license expires upon the expiration of the licensed patent; however, upon such expiration, we will have a fully paid-up, nonexclusive, unlimited, worldwide, sublicensable license to the technology developed on the basis of the patent and related patent rights and all inventions, know-how and other intellectual property owned or licensed by us and covered by the agreement or related thereto. The license is terminable by the Company upon 30-days prior written notice or by Tolaren if the Company ceases operations for a period of more than 360 days. Otherwise, the license for each of the patents endures until the expiration of such patent, and the license for any other licensed technology survives indefinitely.

Approximately 97% of the issued and outstanding share capital of Toleran is held by Hadasit Bio-Holdings Ltd., which was formerly a major shareholder.

Hadasit Medical Research Services and Development Ltd. and Yissum Research and Development Company Ltd.

In March 2006, the institutes jointly granted us an exclusive, worldwide, royalty free and sublicensable license to research, develop, commercialize, manufacture, market, sell, distribute and otherwise use and exploit a certain patent and patent rights relating to the therapeutic use of dead or dying cells, including apoptotic or necrotic cells, as well as any associated materials, methods or technology, as well as a method of using the heparin-binding domain of TSP thrombospondin-1, or TSP-1, which we may develop in the future as a molecular-based therapy for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. The license further stipulates that all intellectual property rights, including, any inventions, developments, discoveries, results, products data, information and know-how developed by the Company based on the licensed intellectual rights, belong solely and exclusively to the Company and, to the extent such intellectual property rights are registrable, they may be registered in the name of the Company. Pursuant to the license, we agreed to manage, maintain and defend the licensed patents, including managing the registration of such patents in different countries. The license expires upon the expiration of the licensed patent; however, upon such expiration, we will have a fully paid-up, nonexclusive, unlimited, worldwide, sublicensable license to the technology developed on the basis of the patent and related patent rights and all inventions, know-how and other intellectual property owned or licensed by us and covered by the agreement or related thereto. In addition to certain standard termination provisions relating to the financial condition of each party, we may terminate the license upon 30-days’ prior written notice, and the institutes may terminate the license if we cease our operations for more than 120 days or if the institutes determine, in their reasonable discretion, that we have ceased making reasonable efforts to commercialize the licensed technology.

Hadasit Medical Research Services and Development Ltd. is the technology transfer office of Hadassah Hospital in Jerusalem, where Prof. Dror Mevorach, our former Chief Science & Medical Officer, who stepped down from such position as of March 1, 2024, but remains with the Company as a scientific advisor and a consultant, is currently the Director of the Rheumatology Research Centre.

Intellectual Property and Patents and Proprietary Rights

The proprietary nature of, and protection for, our product candidates and our discovery programs, processes and know-how are important to our business. We own and in-license issued patents and pending patent applications in various jurisdictions worldwide, including fourteen issued patents and five pending patent applications in the United States, five issued patents and two pending applications in Israel, four issued patents and two pending patent applications in Europe Patent Office (EPO) and two international patent applications filed with the World Intellectual Property Organization under the PCT. We have sought patent protection for certain methods of producing and using autologous and allogeneic Allocetra. We also intend to seek patent protection for our discovery programs, and any other inventions to which we have rights, where available and when appropriate.

Our policy is to pursue, maintain and defend patent rights, whether developed internally or licensed from third parties, and to protect the technology, inventions and improvements that are commercially important to the development of our business. We also rely on trade secrets that may be important to the development of our business.

Our commercial success will substantially depend on obtaining and maintaining patent protection and trade secret protection for our current and future product candidates and the methods used to develop and manufacture them, as well as successfully defending these patents against third-party challenges. Our ability to stop third parties from making, using, selling, offering to sell or importing our products depends on the extent to which we have rights under valid and enforceable patents or trade secrets that cover these activities. We believe that our patents do, and filed patent applications will, provide broad and comprehensive coverage for the use of Allocetra™ as a treatment for our key target clinical indications. However, the patent positions of biotechnology companies, such as ourselves, are generally uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions. Our ability to maintain and solidify our proprietary position, if any, for the technology will depend on our success in obtaining effective claims and enforcing those claims once granted.

There is no certainty that any of our pending patent applications will result in the issuance of any patents. Our issued patents and those that may be issued in the future, could be challenged, narrowed, circumvented or found to be invalid or unenforceable, which could limit our ability to stop competitors from marketing related products or the length of term of patent protection that we may have for our products. In addition, our competitors may independently develop similar technologies or duplicate any technology developed by us, and the rights granted under any issued or future patents may not provide us with any meaningful competitive advantages against these competitors. Furthermore, because of the extensive time required for development, testing and regulatory review of a potential product, before any of our product candidates can be commercialized, any related patent may expire or remain in force for only a short period following commercialization, thereby reducing any advantage of such patent.

Trade Secrets

In addition to owned and licensed patents, we rely on trade secrets and know-how to develop and maintain our competitive position. Trade secrets and know-how can be difficult to protect. We seek to protect our proprietary processes, in part, by confidentiality and intellectual property ownership and assignment agreements or provisions with certain of our employees, consultants, scientific advisors, contractors and commercial partners involved in research and development activities or who may otherwise have access to our confidential or proprietary information. These agreements are designed to protect our proprietary information. We also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our data, trade secrets and know-how by maintaining physical security of our premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems. While we have confidence in these individuals, organizations and systems, such agreements or security measures may be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies for any such breach. In addition, our trade secrets may otherwise become known or be independently discovered by competitors or others, which would significantly affect our competitive advantage and have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operation and financial condition. See also “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property—Under applicable U.S. and Israeli law, we may not be able to enforce covenants not to compete and therefore may be unable to prevent our competitors from benefiting from the expertise of some of our former employees.”

Raw Materials, Suppliers and Manufacturing

In order to produce Allocetra™, blood donations are collected from healthy donors through apheresis and then shipped to a manufacturing site for cryopreservation by trained personnel pursuant to cGMP requirements and otherwise in accordance with applicable FDA guidelines and our CMC protocols. Donations for Allocetra^TM are collected from healthy donors through apheresis. The cells sourced for Allocetra^TM then undergo quality control testing and are thawed and manipulated ex vivo by inducing apoptosis to retrieve and harvest stable early apoptotic cells. The agents used in the ex vivo manipulation for Allocetra™ are then washed and removed before the apoptotic cells are combined with a saline solution for delivery and injection in patients. We use standard collection equipment and procedures to collect blood for Allocetra™ production and anticipate entering into long-term agreements with various collection and medical centers to properly train their personnel pursuant to cGMP requirements, FDA guidelines and our CMC protocols and thereafter collect blood at their facilities upon receipt of patient or donor consent. Other than the blood collections, we believe that the raw materials required to manufacture our product candidates are readily available commodities commonly used in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries and are generally widely available from numerous suppliers at market prices. However, biologically sourced raw materials are subject to unique contamination risks and their use may be restricted in certain countries. See also “Risk Factors—Risks Related to our Business, Industry and Regulatory Requirements—Our manufacturing processes are complex, delicate and susceptible to contamination, and involve biological intermediates that are subject to stringent regulations,” and “Risk Factors—Risks Related to our Business, Industry and Regulatory Requirements—Our ability to produce safe and effective products depends on the safety of our blood supply against transmittable diseases.” 

There can be no assurance that any of our product candidates, if approved, including Allocetra™, can be manufactured in sufficient commercial quantities, in compliance with regulatory requirements and at an acceptable cost. We and our any potential future contract manufacturers are, and will be, subject to extensive governmental regulation in connection with the manufacture of any pharmaceutical products. We and our future contract manufacturers must ensure that all of the processes, methods and equipment are compliant with our CMC and cGMP for drugs and biologics on an ongoing basis, as mandated by EMA and other applicable regulatory authorities, and conduct extensive audits of vendors, contract laboratories and suppliers.

Clinical and Commercial Manufacturing 

We manufacture Allocetra^TM at our existing cGMP facility in Ness Ziona site to accommodate our current clinical supply demand. On March 31, 2024, we entered into the Agreement with the purchaser, pursuant to which the purchaser agreed to acquire the Equipment and assume all of Enlivex’s obligations under the Lease Agreement, effective as of April 1, 2024, for the Purchase Price.

The transition to Allocetra^TM frozen formulation as well as the long-term storage stability of Allocetra^TM at -80^oC and liquid nitrogen, introduced substantial efficiencies in our manufacturing operations, allowing us to stockpile drug product for short and long term storage and effectively manage our clinical supply and reduce potential waste. Moreover, local administration of Allocetra^TM directly into a target joint is given at lower doses compared to systemic administration. In connection with the ongoing osteoarthritis clinical trials, in which AllocetraTM is administered directly into a target joint, we can manufacture a significant amount of Allocetra^TM from a single doner for local administration and can better accommodate the clinical manufacturing demand utilizing a lower manufacturing capacity. Therefore, we expect to have sufficient manufacturing capacity to support our clinical trials for the Indications and that the sale of the Yavne facility will not have any negative effect on supporting our clinical trials.

Contract Research Organizations

We intend to outsource certain future clinical trial activities, including the administration of treatments, to CROs. Such clinical CROs must comply with guidelines from the International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use, which attempt to harmonize the FDA and the EMA regulations and guidelines. We intend to create and implement the development plans and manage the CROs according to the specific requirements of the product candidate under development. To the extent clinical research is conducted by the CROs (or us in the future), compliance with certain federal regulations, including but not limited to 21 C.F.R. parts 50, 54, 56, 58 and 312, which pertain to, among other things, informed consent, financial conflicts of interest by investigators, IRBs, good laboratory practices, GCP and submitting IND applications, may be required.

Marketing, Sales and Commercialization

Given our stage of development, we do not have any internal sales, marketing or distribution infrastructure or capabilities. If we receive regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, we intend, as appropriate, to pursue commercialization relationships, including strategic alliances and licensing, with biotechnology companies and other strategic partners, which are equipped to market and sell our products, if any, through their sales, marketing and distribution organizations. In addition, we may out-license some or all of our worldwide patent rights to more than one party to achieve the fullest development, marketing and distribution of any products we develop. Over the longer term, we may consider building an internal marketing, sales and commercial infrastructure.

Environmental Matters

We, our agents and our service providers, including our manufacturers, are subject to various environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those governing air emissions, water and wastewater discharges, noise emissions, the use, management and disposal of hazardous and biological materials and wastes and the cleanup of contaminated sites. We believe that our business, operations and facilities, including, to our knowledge, those of our agents and service providers, are currently operated in compliance in all material respects with applicable environmental and health and safety laws and regulations. Based on information currently available to us, we do not expect environmental costs and contingencies to have a material adverse effect on us. However, significant expenditures could be required in the future if we, our agents or our service providers are required to comply with new or more stringent environmental or health and safety laws, regulations or requirements.

Government Regulation

Clinical trials, the drug approval process and the marketing of drugs are extensively regulated in the United States and in all other major foreign countries. Governmental authorities in the United States (including federal, state and local authorities) and in other countries, extensively regulate, among other things, the manufacturing, research and clinical development, marketing, labeling and packaging, storage, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, advertising and promotion, pricing and export and import of pharmaceutical products, such as those we are developing. The process for obtaining regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources.

European Union/Rest of World Government Regulation

In addition to regulations in the United States, we will be subject to a variety of regulations in other jurisdictions governing, among other things, clinical trials and any commercial sales and distribution of our products.

Whether or not we obtain FDA approval for a product, we must obtain the requisite approvals from regulatory authorities in foreign countries prior to the commencement of clinical trials or marketing of the product in those countries. Certain countries outside of the United States have a similar process that requires the submission of a clinical trial application much like the IND prior to the commencement of human clinical trials. In the European Union, for example, a clinical trial application (“CTA”), must be submitted for each clinical protocol to each country’s national health authority and an independent ethics committee, much like the FDA and IRB, respectively. Once the CTA is accepted in accordance with a country’s requirements, the clinical trial may proceed.

The requirements and process governing the conduct of clinical trials vary from country to country. In all cases, the clinical trials are conducted in accordance with GCP, the applicable regulatory requirements, and the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki.

To obtain regulatory approval of an investigational medicinal product under European Union regulatory systems, we must submit a marketing authorization application. The content of the NDA or BLA filed in the United States is similar to that required in the European Union, with the exception of, among other things, country and EU-specific document requirements.

For other countries outside of the European Union, such as countries in Eastern Europe, Latin America or Asia, the requirements governing product licensing, pricing, and reimbursement vary from country to country.

Countries that are part of the European Union, as well as countries outside of the European Union, have their own governing bodies, requirements, and processes with respect to the approval of pharmaceutical products. If we fail to comply with applicable foreign regulatory requirements, we may be subject to, among other things, fines, suspension or withdrawal of regulatory approvals, product recalls, seizure of products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecution.

Authorization Procedures in the European Union

Medicines can be authorized in the European Union by using either the centralized authorization procedure or national authorization procedures.

Centralized procedure. The European Commission implemented the centralized procedure for the approval of human medicines to facilitate marketing authorizations that are valid throughout the EEA which is comprised of the 27 member states of the European Union plus Norway, Iceland, and Lichtenstein. This procedure results in a single marketing authorization issued by the European Commission that is valid across the EEA. The centralized procedure is compulsory for human medicines that are: derived from biotechnology processes, such as genetic engineering; contain a new active substance indicated for the treatment of certain diseases, such as HIV/AIDS, cancer, diabetes, neurodegenerative disorders or autoimmune diseases and other immune dysfunctions; and officially designated orphan medicines.

For medicines that do not fall within these categories, an applicant has the option of submitting an application for a centralized marketing authorization to the EMA following a favorable eligibility request by the EMA, as long as the medicine concerned is a significant therapeutic, scientific or technical innovation, or if its authorization would be in the interest of public health.

National authorization procedures. There are also two other possible routes to authorize medicinal products in several European Union countries, which are available for investigational medicinal products that fall outside the scope of the centralized procedure:

Decentralized procedure. Using the decentralized procedure, an applicant may apply for simultaneous authorization in more than one European Union country of medicinal products that have not yet been authorized in any European Union country and that do not fall within the mandatory scope of the centralized procedure.

Mutual recognition procedure. In the mutual recognition procedure, a medicine is first authorized in one European Union Member State, in accordance with the procedure laid down in the EU directive 2001/83 as amended and implemented into national legislation. Following this, further marketing authorizations can be sought from other European Union countries in a procedure whereby the countries concerned agree to recognize the validity of the original, national marketing authorization.

In some cases, a Pediatric Investigation Plan, or PIP, and/or a request for waiver or deferral, is required for submission prior to submitting a marketing authorization application. A PIP describes, among other things, proposed pediatric trials and their timing relative to clinical trials in adults.

New Chemical Entity Exclusivity

In the European Union, new chemical entities, sometimes referred to as new active substances or new molecular entities, as well as submissions following Article 8.3 of Directive 2001/83 as amended, qualify for eight years of data exclusivity upon marketing authorization and an additional two years of market exclusivity. This data exclusivity, if granted, prevents regulatory authorities in the European Union from referencing the innovator’s data to assess a generic (abbreviated) application for eight years, after which generic marketing authorization can be submitted, and the innovator’s data may be referenced, the product may be approved but must not be launched prior to the end of the 10 years data exclusivity period. The overall ten-year period will be extended by one year if, during the first eight years of those ten years, the marketing authorization holder obtains an authorization for one or more new therapeutic indications which, during the scientific evaluation prior to their authorization, is held to bring a significant clinical benefit, in comparison with existing therapies, or by six months if there is a pediatric development in accordance with a PIP has been performed.

Orphan Drug Designation and Exclusivity

In the European Union, the EMA’s COMP grants orphan drug designation to promote the development of products that are intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of life-threatening or chronically debilitating conditions affecting not more than five in 10,000 persons in the European Union and for which no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention, or treatment has been authorized (or the product would be a significant benefit to those affected, i.e. where a prior approval was granted). Additionally, designation is granted for products intended for the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of a life-threatening, seriously debilitating or serious and chronic condition and when, without incentives, it is unlikely that sales of the drug in the European Union would be sufficient to justify the necessary investment in developing the medicinal product.

In the European Union, orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as reduction of fees or fee waivers and 10 years of market exclusivity is granted following medicinal product approval. This period may be reduced to six years if the orphan drug designation criteria are no longer met, including where it is shown that the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity. This period can be prolonged to 12 years in case a pediatric development has been performed following an agreed PIP.

Orphan drug designation must be requested and granted before submitting an application for marketing approval. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process.

Exceptional Circumstances/Conditional Approval

Orphan drugs or drugs with unmet medical needs may be eligible for European Union approval under exceptional circumstances or with conditional approval. Approval under exceptional circumstances is applicable to all applications including orphan products and is used when an applicant is unable to provide comprehensive data on the efficacy and safety under normal conditions of use because the indication for which the product is intended is encountered so rarely that the applicant cannot reasonably be expected to provide comprehensive evidence, when the present state of scientific knowledge does not allow comprehensive information to be provided, or when it is medically unethical to collect such information. Conditional marketing authorization is applicable to orphan medicinal products, medicinal products for seriously debilitating or life-threatening diseases, or medicinal products to be used in emergency situations in response to recognized public threats. Conditional marketing authorization can be granted on the basis of less complete data than is normally required in order to meet unmet medical needs and in the interest of public health, provided the risk-benefit balance is positive, it is likely that the applicant will be able to provide the comprehensive clinical data after approval, and unmet medical needs will be fulfilled. Conditional marketing authorization is subject to certain specific obligations to be reviewed annually. The initial approval needs to be renewed annually. This renewal is controlled by the CHMP and, if not granted, may lead to cessation of the marketing authorization at the end of this particular year.

Accelerated Review

Under the centralized procedure in the European Union, the maximum timeframe for the evaluation of a marketing authorization application 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 EMA’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use, or CHMP). Accelerated evaluation might be granted by the CHMP in exceptional cases, when a medicinal product is expected to be of a major public health interest, particularly from the point of view of therapeutic innovation. In this circumstance, EMA ensures that the opinion of the CHMP is given within 150 days, excluding clock stops.

U.S. Government Regulation

In the United States, the FDA regulates drugs and biologics under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the “FDCA”), and related regulations, and the Public Health Service Act (the “PHSA”) and its implementing regulations. In addition, drug innovation, prescribing and reimbursement are influenced by Titles XVIII and XIX of the Social Security Act (commonly referred to as Medicare and Medicaid, respectively) and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, 42 U.S.C. § 18001, as amended, and their implementing regulations. FDA approval is required before any new drug or biologic candidate or dosage form, including a new use of a previously approved drug, can be marketed in the United States. We intend to submit a BLA in the United States. Failure to comply with the applicable United States regulatory requirements at any time during the product development process, approval process or after approval may subject an applicant to administrative or judicial sanctions. These sanctions could include the imposition by the FDA or an IRB of a clinical hold on trials, the FDA’s refusal to approve pending applications or supplements, license suspension or revocation, withdrawal of an approval, warning letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, other corrective action, injunctions, fines, civil penalties or criminal prosecution. Any agency or judicial enforcement action could have a material adverse effect on us.

The FDA and foreign regulatory authorities impose substantial requirements upon the clinical development, manufacture and marketing of pharmaceutical products. These agencies and other federal, state and local entities regulate research and development activities and the testing, manufacture, quality control, safety, effectiveness, labeling, storage, distribution, record keeping, approval, advertising and promotion of our products.

The FDA’s policies may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent or delay regulatory approval of our platforms and candidate products or any future product candidates or approval of new disease indications or label changes. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of adverse governmental regulation that might arise from future legislative or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad.

Marketing Approval

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

The testing and approval processes require substantial time and financial resources, and we cannot be certain that any approvals for our candidate products will be granted on a timely basis, if at all.

An IND is a request for authorization from the FDA to administer an investigational new drug or biologic product to humans. The central focus of an IND submission is on the general investigational plan and the protocol(s) for human studies. The IND also includes results of in vitro and in vivo studies and animal testing results assessing the toxicology, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamic characteristics of the product; chemistry, manufacturing and controls information; and any available human data or literature to support the use of the investigational new drug. An IND must become effective before human clinical trials may begin. An IND will automatically become effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless before that time the FDA raises concerns or questions related to the proposed clinical trials. In such a case, the IND may be placed on clinical hold and the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns or questions before clinical trials can begin. Accordingly, submission of an IND may or may not result in the FDA allowing clinical trials to commence.

We will need to successfully complete clinical trials in order to be in a position to submit a BLA to the FDA. Our planned future clinical trials for our candidate products may not begin or be completed on schedule, if at all. Clinical trials can be delayed for a variety of reasons, including:

We must reach an agreement with the FDA on the proposed protocols for our future clinical trials in the United States. A separate submission apart from an IND application must be made for each clinical trial to be conducted during product development. Further, an independent IRB for each site proposed to conduct the clinical trial must review and approve the plan for any clinical trial before it commences at that site. Informed consent must also be obtained from each trial subject. Regulatory authorities, an IRB or the sponsor, may suspend or terminate a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the participants are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk.

Clinical trials

Clinical trials involve the administration of the product candidate to human subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators in accordance with current clinical practices (“GCP”), which include the requirement that all research subjects provide their informed consent for their participation in any clinical trial. Clinical trials are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the trial, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety and the efficacy 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. Additionally, approval must also be obtained from each clinical trial site’s IRB before the studies may be initiated and the IRB must monitor the trial until completed. There are also requirements governing the reporting of ongoing clinical trials and clinical trial results to public registries.

Our objective is to conduct clinical trials for our candidate products and, if those trials are successful, seek marketing approval from the FDA and other worldwide regulatory bodies.

For purposes of NDA approval, human clinical trials are typically conducted in phases that may overlap.