Avidity Biosciences (RNA) 10-K2020 FY Annual report

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, DC 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2020

OR

FOR THE TRANSITION PERIOD FROM                     TO                     

Commission file number: 001-39321

AVIDITY BIOSCIENCES, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

(858) 401-7900

(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)

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

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

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

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the 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, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

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

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

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

As of June 30, 2020, the aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately $887.4 million, based on the closing price of the registrant’s common stock on the Nasdaq Global Market of $28.26 per share.

As of February 26, 2021, the registrant had 37,584,600 shares of common stock outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Certain sections of the registrant’s definitive proxy statement for the 2021 annual meeting of stockholders to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Regulation 14A not later than 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Form 10-K are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K. 

AVIDITY BIOSCIENCES, INC.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FORM 10-K

For the Year Ended December 31, 2020

INDEX

PART I

Forward-Looking Statements and Market Data

This annual report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act. All statements other than statements of historical facts contained in this annual report, including statements regarding our future results of operations and financial position, business strategies and plans, research and development plans, the anticipated timing, costs, design and conduct of our ongoing and planned preclinical studies and planned clinical trials for our product candidates, the timing and likelihood of regulatory filings and approvals for our product candidates, the impact of COVID-19 on our business, the timing and likelihood of success, plans and objectives of management for future operations and future results of anticipated product development efforts, are forward-looking statements. These statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other important factors that may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. This annual report on Form 10-K also contains estimates and other statistical data made by independent parties and by us relating to market size and growth and other data about our industry. This data involves a number of assumptions and limitations, and you are cautioned not to give undue weight to such estimates. In addition, projections, assumptions and estimates of our future performance and the future performance of the markets in which we operate are necessarily subject to a high degree of uncertainty and risk.

In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terms such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “expect,” “plan,” “anticipate,” “could,” “intend,” “target,” “project,” “contemplate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “potential” or “continue” or the negative of these terms or other similar expressions. The forward-looking statements in this annual report are only predictions. We have based these forward-looking statements largely on our current expectations and projections about future events and financial trends that we believe may affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this annual report and are subject to a number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions, including those described in Part I, Item 1A, “Risk Factors.” The events and circumstances reflected in our forward-looking statements may not be achieved or occur, and actual results could differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements. Moreover, we operate in an evolving environment. New risk factors and uncertainties may emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for management to predict all risk factors and uncertainties. Except as required by applicable law, we do not plan to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements contained herein, whether as a result of any new information, future events, changed circumstances or otherwise.

This annual report includes trademarks, tradenames and service marks that are the property of other organizations. Solely for convenience, trademarks and tradenames referred to in this annual report appear without the ® and ™ symbols, but those references are not intended to indicate, in any way, that we will not assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, our rights, or that the applicable owner will not assert its rights, to these trademarks and tradenames.

We maintain a website at www.aviditybiosciences.com, to which we regularly post copies of our press releases as well as additional information about us. Our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, are available free of charge through our website as soon as reasonably practicable after being electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC. Information contained in our website does not constitute a part of this report or our other filings with the SEC.

ITEM 1.  Business

We are pioneering a new class of oligonucleotide-based therapies called Antibody Oligonucleotide Conjugates, or AOCs, designed to overcome the current limitations of oligonucleotide therapies in order to treat a wide range of serious diseases. We utilize our proprietary AOC platform to design, engineer and develop therapeutics that combine the tissue selectivity of monoclonal antibodies, or mAbs, and the

1

precision of oligonucleotide therapies in order to access previously undruggable tissue and cell types and more effectively target underlying genetic drivers of diseases. We are initially focused on muscle diseases to demonstrate the capabilities of our AOCs, and our muscle franchise consists of five programs. Our lead product candidate, AOC 1001, is designed to treat myotonic dystrophy type 1, or DM1, a rare monogenic muscle disease. Following regulatory clearance, we plan to initiate a Phase 1/2 clinical trial of AOC 1001 in the second half of 2021. We also intend to advance AOC product candidates in our four other muscle programs focused on the treatment of facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy, or FSHD, Duchenne muscular dystrophy, or DMD, muscle atrophy and Pompe disease. In addition to our muscle franchise, we have development efforts focused on immune, cardiac and other cell types.

Our AOC Platform

Oligonucleotide therapeutics are designed based on genomic information to specifically inhibit or modify the expression of disease-related proteins and RNAs. Considerable progress has been made toward harnessing the potential of oligonucleotides, and multiple oligonucleotide therapies have been approved for the treatment of several diseases. However, in light of their physical properties, effective systemic delivery of oligonucleotides to a broad range of cells and organs has been one of the most significant factors limiting their utility. Our deep experience with oligonucleotide therapeutics, modulation of RNA processes, antibody engineering and conjugation, and drug delivery techniques provide the foundation for our efforts to address some of the key limitations of oligonucleotide therapies. We collectively refer to the know-how and proprietary technology born out of this experience, and their systematic application in the design and development of our product candidates, as our AOC platform.

Using our AOC platform, we have established a framework for screening potential cell surface protein-mAb pairs to determine which pairs are well-suited to deliver oligonucleotides to specific cell types to induce pharmacologic changes. In addition to engineering optimized mAbs, we are able to engineer and deploy various types of oligonucleotides whose specific mechanisms of action are designed to modify RNA function in different ways. This flexibility allows us to use oligonucleotides tailored to have the potential to modulate a given disease process, and we further engineer our oligonucleotides to maximize their specificity, potency and stability. Beyond the specific mAb and oligonucleotide components of our engineered AOCs, we also optimize the antibody conjugate design, including the linker, for stability and durability.

We believe that the product candidates derived from our AOC platform will have the potential to offer the following distinct advantages:

We are initially focused on muscle diseases for which we believe our AOC approach can overcome the limitations of current oligonucleotide therapies. For example, a single dose of an AOC administered to

2

mice demonstrated a 95% reduction of target gene expression in mouse skeletal muscle, which in part led us to focus on developing a pipeline of AOCs in muscle diseases.

The first program in our muscle franchise is for the treatment of DM1 and we are developing our lead product candidate, AOC 1001, as a potentially disease-modifying therapeutic. DM1 is a monogenic, autosomal dominant, progressive disease that primarily affects skeletal and cardiac muscle and is caused by a mutation in the dystrophy myotonic protein kinase, or DMPK, gene product or DMPK RNA. DM1 is estimated to affect over 40,000 people in the United States and there are similar prevalence estimates for Europe. However, we believe that, consistent with other rare diseases, the patient population is currently underdiagnosed due to the lack of available therapies. AOC 1001 consists of a proprietary mAb that binds to a transporter protein, transferrin receptor 1, or TfR1, conjugated with a small interfering RNA, or siRNA, that is designed to address the underlying cause of DM1 by reducing the levels of DMPK RNA. In preclinical studies, we observed the ability of our AOC to deliver siRNAs to muscle cells, and reduce levels of messenger RNA, or mRNA, for the DMPK gene, the molecular driver of the disease, in a durable, dose-dependent manner, meaning a long-lasting effect that is proportional to the amount of the AOC administered. Following regulatory clearance, we plan to initiate a Phase 1/2 clinical trial of AOC 1001 in patients in the second half of 2021 to assess the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and exploratory clinical measures associated with AOC 1001. Due to the lack of available therapies in this rare disease, should our trial be successful, we plan to explore the potential to advance AOC 1001 into registrational trials in order to expedite making AOC 1001 available for a patient population in severe need.

We also are developing AOCs to treat the underlying causes of FSHD, DMD, muscle atrophy and Pompe disease. FSHD is one of the most common forms of muscular dystrophy, with onset typically in teens and young adults. FSHD occurs in approximately one in every 20,000 individuals in the United States and we estimate that FSHD affects 16,000 to 38,000 people in the United States. However, we believe that, consistent with other rare diseases, the patient population is currently underdiagnosed due to the lack of available therapies. FSHD is caused by aberrant expression of a gene, double homeobox 4, or DUX4, in adult skeletal muscle and is characterized by progressive skeletal muscle loss. Our therapeutic strategy in FSHD is to use an AOC based on our proprietary mAb targeting TfR1, to deliver an siRNA targeted to the DUX4 mRNA. We are currently in the process of advancing our AOC FSHD program into investigational new drug application, or IND, enabling studies. Following additional preparatory preclinical studies and regulatory clearance, we plan to initiate clinical studies in 2022 to assess the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and exploratory clinical measures associated with the AOC FSHD program. Due to the lack of available therapies in this rare disease, should our trial be successful, we plan to explore the potential to advance our AOC FSHD program into registrational trials in order to expedite making it available for a patient population in severe need.

Another program in our muscle franchise is for the treatment of DMD, which is the most common and severe form of muscular dystrophy and is progressive, irreversible and ultimately fatal. DMD occurs in approximately one in every 3,500 to 5,000 live male births and is estimated to affect 10,000 to 15,000 people in the United States. DMD is caused by mutations in the DMD gene that encodes for the gene product dystrophin, a protein critical for the normal function of muscle cells. These mutations lead to certain exons being misread resulting in the loss of function of the dystrophin protein. Our oligonucleotides are designed to promote the skipping of those exons to restore a functional version of the dystrophin protein. We are focusing our initial efforts on the development of AOCs for mutations amenable to skipping Exon 44, Exon 51 and Exon 45. We intend to conjugate the oligonucleotides to our proprietary mAb targeting TfR1. In a preclinical model of DMD, the mdx mouse model, we observed that treatment of mdx mice with an AOC caused a greater than 50-fold increase in exon skipping compared to an equimolar dose of the unconjugated oligonucleotide. We have three programs in development for DMD targeting Exon 44, Exon 51 and Exon 45. We are currently in the process of advancing our first program targeting Exon 44 into IND-enabling studies. Following additional preparatory preclinical studies and regulatory clearance, we plan to commence a clinical trial for our program targeting Exon 44 in 2022.

An additional program in our muscle franchise is for muscle atrophy. Muscle atrophy is the loss of skeletal muscle mass that leads to muscle weakness and physical disability and can be caused by malnutrition, medications, injury or diseases such as cachexia and many rare genetic muscle disorders.

3

Our product candidate will consist of our proprietary mAb targeting TfR1 conjugated with an siRNA designed to downregulate the levels of muscle RING-finger protein-1, or MuRF1, mRNA, a muscle-specific ubiquitin ligase, or E3 ligase, that has been shown to be upregulated upon induction of muscle atrophy. By targeting MuRF1, we have focused on an approach employing common effectors of both the catabolic and anabolic pathways associated with the degradation of protein in muscle cells, unlike prior attempts to find therapeutics that primarily addressed either catabolic or anabolic pathways. In preclinical studies, we observed that a single 3 mg/kg dose of the siRNA in our AOC resulted in a greater than 50% reduction in MuRF1 mRNA for over 20 weeks.  We are in the process of evaluating multiple disease models of muscle atrophy to identify an optimal development path in rare disease indications and/or in diseases that impact large patient populations. Our continued research activities will inform our view on the indications and development path to pursue.

We are also pursuing a program in Pompe disease, a rare muscle disease. Pompe disease is a autosomal recessive lysosomal storage disease caused by a mutation in the gene that encodes for acid alpha-glucosidase, or GAA, that results in the buildup of glycogen in the body’s cells, causing impairment of normal tissue and organ function. Pompe disease is currently treated with enzyme replacement therapy, or ERT, which does not adequately address the breakdown of muscle tissue associated with the disease. Our program in Pompe disease also utilizes an AOC based on our proprietary mAb targeting TfR1 to deliver an siRNA targeting the glycogen synthetase 1, or GYS1, mRNA to diminish the toxic accumulation of glycogen in muscle. We are in the process of developing a lead candidate for Pompe disease.

We also intend to pursue the development of AOCs in cell types in addition to muscle. In preclinical models, we observed the ability of AOCs not only to deliver to the liver, skeletal and cardiac muscle, but also to other tissue and cell types, including immune cells. For example, we have identified multiple receptor-antibody pairs that could be used in our AOCs in order to deliver siRNAs into different immune cells, including those related to immuno-oncology. In preclinical studies, we observed significant AOC-mediated mRNA knockdown in CD8+ and CD4+ tumor infiltrating lymphocytes and T-regs in vivo, while also observing no effect on mRNA levels in T or B cells in the spleen. These observations around the specificity and selectivity of our AOCs are the basis for our interest in exploring the utility of our AOCs in immunology. We plan to continue to invest in our AOC platform in order to explore the potential of our AOCs in previously inaccessible tissue and cell types in order to develop next generation oligonucleotide therapies.

We hold worldwide development and commercialization rights to all our muscle programs. We have a disciplined strategy to maximize the value of our pipeline whereby we plan to retain development and commercialization rights to those product candidates, indications and geographies that we believe we can ultimately commercialize successfully on our own. We plan to collaborate on product candidates that we believe have promising utility in disease areas or patient populations that are better served by the resources or specific expertise of other biopharmaceutical companies. In April 2019, we entered into a Research Collaboration and License Agreement, or the Lilly Agreement, with Eli Lilly and Company, or Lilly, for the discovery, development and commercialization of AOCs directed to up to six mRNA targets initially in immunology and other select indications on a worldwide basis. In December 2020, we entered into a research collaboration with MyoKardia, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bristol Myers Squibb, to evaluate the potential utility of AOCs in cardiac tissue by leveraging MyoKardia's genetic cardiomyopathy platform including, among other aspects, its novel target discovery engine and proprietary cardiac disease models.

We have assembled a management team with deep experience in the discovery, development and commercialization of RNA therapeutics, including an extensive knowledge of oligonucleotide therapeutics, modulation of RNA processes, antibody engineering and conjugation, and drug delivery techniques. Our management team also has broad experience in the discovery, development and commercialization of products for rare diseases, including building clinical and commercial organizations that support the unique needs of the rare disease community.

4

Our Strategy

Our goal is to discover, develop and commercialize novel AOC therapeutics that overcome current barriers to the delivery of oligonucleotides and unlock their potential to treat a wide range of serious diseases currently lacking adequate treatment options. Key elements of our strategy to achieve this goal are to:

5

Our AOC Product Platform

Overview

We are pioneering a new class of oligonucleotide-based therapies called AOCs designed to overcome the current limitations of oligonucleotide therapies in order to treat a wide range of serious diseases. We utilize our proprietary AOC platform to design, engineer and develop therapeutics that combine the tissue selectivity of mAbs and the precision of oligonucleotide therapies in order to access previously undruggable tissue and cell types and more effectively target underlying genetic drivers of diseases. All of our oligonucleotides target disease-related RNA. RNA is a polymeric molecule essential in the coding, decoding, regulation and expression of genes. We have accumulated deep experience regarding oligonucleotide therapeutics, modulation of RNA processes, antibody engineering and conjugation, and drug delivery techniques. We collectively refer to the know-how and proprietary technology born out of this experience, and their systematic application in the design and development of our product candidates, as our AOC Platform.

Evolution of Oligonucleotide Therapeutics

Oligonucleotide therapeutics are typically short strands of modified RNA or DNA that are manufactured by chemical synthesis. They are designed, based on genomic information using Watson and Crick base pairing rules, to inhibit or modify the expression of specific disease-related proteins and RNAs. Because mRNA serves as the template for synthesis of all proteins, modulating the levels or function of a disease-related RNA alters the production of disease-associated proteins in a highly specific fashion which, in turn, alters disease processes. When delivered to the cells where the functional change is needed, oligonucleotides have been shown to be effective at modifying the molecular basis of the disease.

Considerable progress has been made toward harnessing the potential of oligonucleotides, and multiple oligonucleotide therapies have been approved for the treatment of several diseases. However, in light of their physical properties, such as their size and water solubility, effective systemic delivery of oligonucleotides to a broad range of cells and organs has been one of the most significant factors limiting their utility.

Single-stranded phosphorothioate oligonucleotides (often referred to as antisense oligonucleotides, or ASOs) bind nonspecifically to plasma and cell surface proteins. As a result, ASOs accumulate in the liver and the kidney as part of the natural filtering function of those organs. However, even when the liver is the target organ for delivery, the ASO’s non-specific binding and uptake results in most of the drug being delivered to non-parenchymal cells rather than the true target for therapeutic activity, hepatic parenchymal cells. As a result, many early ASO-based therapeutics were limited to organs where site-specific delivery to cells was an effective therapeutic approach, for example by intrathecal administration to the central nervous system or by intravitreal administration to the retina.

Unlike ASOs, the physical properties of siRNA and phosphorodiamidate morpholino oligomers, or PMOs, render them so they can only weakly bind to either plasma or cell surface proteins. Thus, they are ultimately cleared rapidly from plasma by renal filtration, with fractional reabsorption in the kidney. If unconjugated, or unformulated, these oligonucleotides have minimal uptake into target organs. Therefore, they require high doses to be administered frequently that increase the potential for toxicity, while yielding limited activity.

Despite the limitations of these early unconjugated oligonucleotide technologies, companies have employed these approaches to commercialize oligonucleotide drugs that generated an aggregate of over two billion dollars of sales in 2019.

6

Following these early approaches, the field turned towards finding appropriate conjugates to aid in delivery of oligonucleotides in order to increase uptake. Third parties have conjugated PMO-based oligonucleotides to charged peptides in order to penetrate cells. These peptide PMOs, or PPMOs, help increase uptake into cells such as muscle, but clearance remains relatively rapid and the accumulation of these highly-charged, cell penetrating peptides has been associated with renal functional changes. In clinical trials, these compounds have not yet demonstrated an improvement in efficacy over unconjugated PMOs or established a long-term safety profile.

More recently, researchers have begun to engage proteins on cell surfaces to enhance the delivery of oligonucleotides using a process called receptor-mediated uptake. Conjugating sugar molecules, or GalNAc, to oligonucleotides in order to engage asiaglycoprotein, or ASGPR, a transporter protein expressed primarily on the surface of hepatic parenchymal cells, facilitates intracellular delivery of oligonucleotide therapeutics, resulting in increased efficiency as compared to unconjugated oligonucleotides. The emerging preclinical and clinical data around the GalNAc-ASGPR approach and recent FDA approval of givosiran, which uses this approach, supports the thesis that receptor-mediated uptake is a viable delivery strategy for oligonucleotides therapies.

In order to increase the uptake of oligonucleotides, efforts have also been made to use antibody conjugates as a means of delivering oligonucleotides into cells. Antibodies are naturally occurring proteins produced by the immune system that first identify and then neutralize or clear antigens, such as bacteria, viruses and other substances, by selectively binding to these foreign substances. A mAb is a single, homogeneous entity that recognizes a specific molecular entity, for example a cell surface protein. Today, mAbs are frequently engineered for desired characteristics, such as high selectivity and high affinity for their target cell surface proteins and, therefore, theoretically could facilitate the trafficking of oligonucleotide therapeutics into those cells. However, we believe that others have tried and failed to make viable antibody conjugated oligonucleotides because of the failure to optimize each of the mAb, the oligonucleotide and the antibody conjugate design. Finding the right transport protein and the right mAb requires an understanding of whether there is sufficient density of the targeted cell surface receptor to move the required number of therapeutic molecules into the cell and how to traffic the therapeutic molecules appropriately.

Overall, we believe the advancements in the oligonucleotide field support the hypothesis that delivery of oligonucleotides can be greatly enhanced by using appropriate conjugates that are recognized by specific proteins on the surface of cells.

Our Approach

Our AOC platform was developed out of our deep experience with oligonucleotide therapeutics, modulation of RNA processes, antibody engineering and conjugation, and drug delivery techniques. Based on the data-driven hypothesis that the delivery of oligonucleotides can be greatly enhanced by using antibodies as conjugates, our scientists have established a framework for screening potential cell surface protein-mAb pairs to determine which pairs we believe are well suited to deliver active oligonucleotides to specific cell types. We have identified multiple cell surface protein-mAb pairs that can deliver oligonucleotides into various tissue and cell types to induce pharmacologic changes. For example, we have employed AOCs built on a scaffold of a mAb or mAb fragment that binds with high selectivity and affinity to TfR1 to deliver oligonucleotides to cell types outside of the liver, in particular to muscle.

Our AOC platform also affords us the option to deploy various types of oligonucleotides, including siRNAs and PMOs, whose specific mechanisms of action modify RNA function in different ways. This flexibility allows us to use oligonucleotides that are tailored to modulate a given disease process. Mechanisms of these oligonucleotides can range from reducing the expression of a disease-related RNA with siRNAs, to correction of aberrant processing of RNAs with splice modifying oligonucleotides.

In preclinical studies, our AOCs have demonstrated pharmacologic responses as measured by mRNA reduction in liver, skeletal muscle, cardiac muscle, B- and T-cells and lymphocyte subsets, as well as macrophages (see Figure 1 below).

7

Figure 1: Percent Reduction of Target Gene Expression

Different AOCs and controls were used in each cell type, which were studied independently. The mAb/siRNA for each tissue are as follows: Liver: ASGPR/Factor VII; Muscle/Heart: TfR1/myostatin; B Cells: TfR1/HPRT; Tregs: mAbx/HPRT; CD8+TILs: TfR1/SHP2; and Macrophages: Aby/HPRT.

Our AOC Platform Proprietary Chemistry

Successfully engineering an active AOC requires a sophisticated understanding of the precise characteristics of each of the components of the AOC, as well as their behavior when acting in concert. We have deployed significant know-how towards optimizing our AOCs, beginning with their individual oligonucleotide and mAb components.

Optimization of the oligonucleotide. We have engineered our oligonucleotides to maximize their stability, potency and specificity. For many of our applications, the oligonucleotide we employ is a double-stranded siRNA, comprised of a passenger and guide strand. Modifications to the passenger strand are designed to reduce loading into the RNA Induced Silencing Complex, or RISC, decreasing inadvertent RNA interference activity. In comparison, modifications to the guide strand, also known as the active strand, are designed to enhance RISC loading, increasing the potential for matching sequences in newly transcribed RNA. Following a match, enzymes in the RISC will cleave the targeted mRNA, thereby effectively destroying it and reducing disease-related RNA levels (see Figure 2 below). Our siRNAs have been stabilized to withstand the nucleases in lysosomes, enhancing their ability to escape the lysosome after AOC internalization and antibody degradation.

Figure 2: Mechanisms of Action of Oligonucleotides Used in our AOCs

In preclinical studies, we observed that AOCs in circulation were stable for at least seven days. The biologic activity of the AOC was independent of plasma circulation times because the AOCs were cleared from plasma more rapidly than tissues. Once delivered into cells, our oligonucleotide therapeutics were stabilized and, particularly when loaded into the RISC, had prolonged activity. In mice treated with our AOC,

8

the half-life of siRNA in muscle tissue was approximately 12 days (see left panel of Figure 3 below). In comparison, the half-life of siRNA in RISC had a projected half-life of approximately 80 days, suggesting that, once in tissues, the siRNA is stabilized in RISC, prolonging the duration of action (see right panel of Figure 3 below).

Figure 3: Half-life of siRNA in Mice Muscle Tissue and RISC

Ln represents the logarithm of tissue concentration.

We believe that chemical modifications to the siRNA drive their long-lived pharmacologic activity. We observed that a single dose of 3 mg/kg of an siRNA in an AOC administered to mice reduced the level of muscle RING-finger protein-1, or MuRF1, the targeted mRNA in muscle, for more than five months (see Figure 4 below). We believe that these results suggest that AOCs for muscle diseases may be given as infrequent intravenous doses similar to those that are being used with other siRNA therapeutics in the liver.

Figure 4: Duration of Response to Single 3 mg/kg Dose

Data are expressed as mean (SE) compared to saline controls.

Optimization of the mAb. Because the mAb is the key delivery agent for our oligonucleotides, we are focused on identifying and tailoring mAbs to enhance their selectivity and minimize toxicity. For example, all our muscle programs employ our proprietary, effector function null, fully humanized IgG1 mAb targeting human TfR1. This antibody was selected to minimize interference with transferrin binding, minimizing alterations of iron uptake by the targeted cells. Further, our antibody is selective to TfR1 and does not cross-react with TfR2, which is widely expressed in the liver. Selectivity of our anti-transferrin receptor antibody for human and cynomolgus monkey TfR1 can be attributed to our antibody binding domain, to an epitope that is conserved between human TfR1 and cynomolgus monkey TfR1. To minimize antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity, or ADCC, and complement fixation, we introduced mutations to eliminate effector

9

functions. Reduction of ADCC has been shown for the lead clones. The final clone-expressing cell was selected based on high production yields and optimized physical and chemical properties. The selected mAb demonstrated good delivery into human skeletal muscle cells in vitro and favorable bioconjugation with an siRNA, and polyclonal versions of the mAb showed favorable delivery and pharmacodynamics in studies in cynomolgus monkeys.

Optimization of the antibody conjugate design. In addition to the oligonucleotide and the mAb, we have also optimized the conjugation of the two, including the linker. Our linkers are optimized for stability and durability, as evidenced by preclinical studies in which we observed enhanced stability of some linkers over others (see Figure 5 below).

Figure 5: AOCs with Different Linkers at 0.5 mg/kg

In addition to optimizing our linker, we optimize several other key aspects including sites of conjugation and the ratio of oligonucleotides to antibodies.

Advantages of our AOC Product Platform

We believe that the product candidates derived from our AOC platform will have the potential to offer the following distinct advantages:

10

Our Development Programs

We have leveraged our deep experience with oligonucleotide therapeutics, modulation of RNA processes, antibody engineering and conjugation, and drug delivery techniques to build a pipeline of AOC development programs. Leveraging our access to extensive mAb libraries and our framework for screening potential cell surface protein-mAb pairs, we have studied over 100 different mAbs and dozens of siRNA sequences to form the basis of our growing pipeline. The chart below represents a summary of our wholly owned development programs, which are focused on muscle disease:

In addition to our wholly owned programs in muscle disease, we also have development efforts focused on immune and other cell types. Under the Lilly Agreement, we are collaborating with Lilly for the discovery, development and commercialization of AOCs directed to up to six selected mRNA targets, in immunology and other select indications outside of muscle. Through our research collaboration with Myokardia, we are expanding our development activities to include cardiac-specific indications.

Our Muscle Disease Franchise

We have selected muscle as the first tissue type in which to explore the potential of our AOCs. In our early screening efforts, we observed a 95% reduction of target gene expression in mouse skeletal muscle with the AOC we tested, which in part led us to focus on developing a deep pipeline of AOCs that are designed to address five muscle diseases—DM1, FSHD, DMD, muscle atrophy and Pompe disease. We use the same proprietary mAb targeting TfR1 across our muscle programs, which we believe gives us significant leverage of development costs and timelines associated with each incremental muscle program.

AOC 1001 for the Treatment of Myotonic Dystrophy Type 1 (DM1)

Our lead product candidate, AOC 1001, is a potentially disease-modifying treatment for DM1. AOC 1001 consists of a proprietary mAb targeting TfR1 conjugated with an siRNA that is designed to reduce levels of DMPK RNA, the gene product that when mutated causes DM1. In preclinical studies in mice and cynomolgus monkeys, we observed the ability of AOC 1001 to deliver siRNAs to muscle cells and reduce the levels of DMPK RNA. Following regulatory clearance, we plan to initiate a Phase 1/2 clinical trial of AOC 1001 in the second half of 2021. Due to the lack of available therapies for this rare disease, should our trial be successful, we plan to explore the potential to advance AOC 1001 into registrational trials in order to expedite availability of AOC 1001 to patients.

11

Disease Overview

DM1 is a monogenic, autosomal dominant, progressive disease that primarily affects skeletal and cardiac muscle. People with DM1 can suffer from various manifestations of the disease including myotonia and muscle weakness, respiratory problems, fatigue, hypersomnia, cardiac abnormalities, severe gastrointestinal, or GI, complications, and cognitive and behavioral impairment.

DM1 is caused by an increase in the number of CUG triplet repeats found in the 3’ non-coding region of the DMPK gene product. The number of repeats ranges from up to approximately 35 in healthy individuals to many thousands in people with DM1. The higher-than-normal number of CUG repeats form large hairpin loops that entrap the DMPK pre-mRNA in the nucleus and impart toxic activity, referred to as a toxic gain-of-function. Specifically, mutant DMPK pre-mRNA sequesters a critical CUG-binding protein, muscle blind-like protein, or MBNL, forming nuclear foci and inhibiting its ability to perform its normal function of guiding pre-mRNA processing of gene transcripts from many other genes. As a result, multiple pre-mRNAs that encode key proteins are mis-processed. The resulting atypical proteins that are translated ultimately cause DM1. When DMPK and CUG levels are reduced as result of DPMK mRNA level reductions, nuclear foci are diminished and MBNL can perform its normal function. This disease process is illustrated in Figure 6 below.

Figure 6: DM1 Disease Process

DM1 is estimated to affect over 40,000 people in the United States and there are similar prevalence estimates for Europe. However, we believe that, consistent with other rare diseases, the patient population is currently underdiagnosed due to lack of available therapies. DM1 is highly variable with respect to disease severity, presentation, and age of onset. As we advance our own efforts to better characterize the actual DM1 patient population and as the diagnoses rate improves with the advent of new therapies, we believe that the overall prevalence estimates will increase. Based on age of onset and severity of symptoms, DM1 is typically categorized into four overlapping phenotypes: late-onset; classical (adult-onset); childhood; and congenital, or cDM1.

All forms of DM1, except the late-onset form, are associated with high levels of disease burden and premature mortality. Excluding neonatal cDM1 deaths, life expectancy ranges from 45 years to 60 years. Seventy percent of early mortality is caused by cardiorespiratory complications. Respiratory failure due to muscle weakness (especially diaphragmatic weakness), causes at least 40% of early mortality, and cardiac abnormalities, including sudden death, account for approximately 30%. The clinical course of DM1 is usually slowly progressive, but may become extremely disabling, especially when more generalized limb weakness and respiratory muscle involvement develops. Systemic manifestations such as fatigue, GI complications, incontinence and excessive daytime sleepiness greatly impact a patient’s quality of life. As a result, DM1 leads to physical impairment, activity limitations and decreased participation in social activities and work.

12

Table 2: DM1 Phenotypes

Current Treatment Landscape and Limitations

There are currently no approved therapies to treat DM1, and treatment is focused largely on symptom management. Due to the well-known challenges of delivery, a previous attempt at treating DM1 with an unconjugated antisense oligonucleotide was discontinued. Therefore, there remains a high unmet medical need for new disease modifying therapies.

Tideglusib, an inhibitor of glycogen synthase kinase 3, or GSK3-ß, is in late-stage clinical development for the cDM1. This product candidate does not address the underlying genetic cause of the DM1. We are also aware of multiple preclinical efforts for the treatment of DM1.

Our Solution

AOC 1001 consists of a proprietary mAb that binds to TfR1 conjugated with an siRNA, siDMPK.19, targeted to DMPK RNA, and is designed to be administered to the patient as an intravenous infusion. We believe that the following specific characteristics of AOC 1001 position it to have advantages over historical and current efforts to develop an effective therapy for people with DM1:

13

Our preclinical studies to date support our hypotheses on the potential advantages of AOC 1001. In in vitro experiments in cells from patients with DM1, after treatment with siDMPK.19, we observed reductions in nuclear foci, and a return to more normal splicing patterns for key genes. Additionally, marked and prolonged reduction in DMPK mRNA levels was observed in cynomolgus monkeys after administration of a single intravenous dose of an AOC consisting of the lead TfR1-Ab conjugated to siDMPK.19. Treatment in these monkeys was well-tolerated and no clinically meaningful changes in hematology, serum biochemistry or histology were observed at a dose of 6 mg/kg. Taken together, we believe these data suggest that AOC 1001 has potential to be a disease modifying therapy for the treatment of DM1, and has the potential advantage of infrequent administration.

Preclinical Data and Next Steps

We have observed dose-dependent and long-lasting reductions in the levels of DMPK in cynomolgus monkeys. We observed that a single dose of 2 mg/kg of siDMPK.19 included in AOC 1001 produced an approximately 75% reduction of DMPK mRNA in skeletal muscles from cynomolgus monkeys (see Figure 7 below). Similar effects were observed in cardiac muscle and the diaphragm, where we observed between a 50% to greater than 75% reduction in DMPK levels with single doses of 1 to 5 mg/kg of siDMPK.19 measured six weeks after administration (see left panel of Figure 8 below). Durability of response in the heart and diaphragm was observed in monkeys administered a single dose of 2 mg/kg where there were approximately 50% and 65% reductions in DMPK mRNA levels in cardiac muscle and diaphragm, respectively, 12 weeks after administration (see right panel of Figure 8 below).

Figure 7: DMPK mRNA Levels in Skeletal Muscle from Cynomolgus Monkey

After a Single Dose of 2mg/kg of siDMPK.19

14

Figure 8: DMPK mRNA Levels in Heart and Diaphragm

In preclinical studies in cynomolgus monkeys, we observed that treatment with an AOC containing siDMPK.19 produced a greater than 50% reduction of DMPK mRNA across a wide range of skeletal muscles at a concentration of 1 nM or less and we also observed reductions in DMPK mRNA in the jejunum and ileum (see Figure 9 below).

Figure 9: DMPK mRNA Expression in Skeletal Muscle and GI Tissue

15

There is substantial evidence that siRNA is active in the nucleus of cells and we believe that our RISC-based mechanism is preferable over other strategies. In preclinical studies, we observed that DM1 patient cells have approximately 30-times more metastasis associated lung adenocarcinoma transcript 1, or MALAT1, a long non-coding RNA in the nucleus than in the cytoplasm. In incubation of DM1 patient cells with an siRNA targeting two different concentrations of MALAT1, we observed reductions in the levels of MALAT1, consistent with the literature. We also observed that incubating DM1 patient cells with siDMPK.19 for seven hours reduced levels of the DMPK mRNA in both the nucleus and the cytoplasm as compared to a control (see Figure 10 below).

Figure 10: Nuclear and Cytoplasmic DMPK mRNA Levels in Muscle Cells from Patients with DM1

Because siRNA is active in the nucleus, we observed in preclinical studies that it is possible to reduce the number of MBNL-associated nuclear foci after incubation with siDMPK.19. Using fluorescence microscopy, we observed that incubation of DM1 patient cells with siDMPK.19 resulted in a release of the MBNL and quantifiable reductions in nuclear foci. In addition, we observed substantial improvements in disease-related biomarkers as measured by the splice score in the cells of patients with DM1following treatment with siDMPK.19. We used RNA-sequence, or RNA-seq, analysis of the myotubes from patients with DM1 to create a splice score for control human subjects’ cells treated with siDMPK.19 or the inactive siRNA, siDMPK.29. When patient myotubes were analyzed, there was a marked improvement in the splice score of the myotubes treated with the siDMPK.19 compared to the inactive siDMPK.29 (see Figure 11 below). The splice signature approached that of control myotubes.

16

Figure 11: Correction of Treatment Signature in DM1 Myotubes as Determined by RNA-seq

Splice score of treated DM1 myotubes was observed to be improved towards normal by incubation with siDMPK.19 (blue open circles). Mock treated DM1 myotubes (open black diamonds) show the full splice derangement. The filled circles represent the splice scores in myotubes from normal subjects treated with siDMPK. The filled black diamonds represent mock transfected myotubes from healthy individuals.

These data above demonstrating marked and prolonged reductions in levels of DMPK mRNA expression, nM potency, along with reductions in nuclear foci and a return to more normal splicing patterns for key genes, suggest that AOC 1001 has potential to be a potent, infrequently dosed, disease modifying therapy in DM1. The mAb targeting TfR1 conjugated with siDMPK.19 dosed in monkeys has been well tolerated and no clinically meaningful changes in hematology, serum biochemistry or histology have been observed after administration of a dose of 6 mg/kg.

Following regulatory clearance, we plan to initiate a Phase 1/2 clinical trial of AOC 1001 in the second half of 2021. We plan to evaluate AOC 1001 in adult-onset patients with genetically confirmed DM1 who have measurable muscle strength deficits. We will assess several measures including safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and exploratory clinical measures associated with AOC 1001. We also plan to explore the potential of AOC 1001 in the cDM1 and childhood onset patient populations. Because AOC 1001 targets the underlying cause of DM1 by reducing the level of mutant DMPK mRNA in muscle and heart tissue regardless of the number of CUG repeats, we believe it has the potential to clinically benefit all phenotypes of people with DM1. In addition, we have entered into a collaboration supporting END-DM1, a natural history study to advance the understanding of disease progression in people with DM1. We believe the results of END-DM1 will help inform the clinical development of AOC 1001.

Our Facioscapulohumeral Muscular Dystrophy (FSHD) program

We are pursuing our AOC FSHD program to treat the underlying cause of FSHD, one of the most common forms of muscular dystrophy.  Our therapeutic strategy in FSHD is to use an AOC based on our proprietary mAb that targets TfR1 to deliver an siRNA targeted to DUX4 mRNA. In preclinical models, we observed siRNA-mediated DUX4 silencing in muscle cells from patients with FSHD.  Following regulatory clearance, we plan to advance our AOC FSHD program into a clinical trial in 2022. Due to the lack of available therapies in this rare disease, should our trial be successful, we plan to explore the potential to

17

advance this program into registrational trials in order to expedite making an AOC available for a patient population in severe need.

Disease Overview  

FSHD is characterized by progressive and asymmetric skeletal muscle loss that initially causes weakness in muscles in the face, shoulders, arms and trunk and progresses to weakness in muscles in lower body. Skeletal muscle weakness results in physical limitations throughout the whole body, including an inability to lift arms for more than a few seconds, loss of ability to show facial expressions and serious speech impediments. These symptoms cause many people affected by FSHD to become dependent on the use of a wheelchair for mobility. FSHD affects both sexes equally, with onset typically in teenage and young adult years.

FSHD is an autosomal dominant disease with a high frequency of de novo mutations. FSHD is a complex disease caused by the aberrant expression of the DUX4 gene in the skeletal muscle. Expression of DUX4 and its downstream genes is the major molecular signature that distinguishes muscle tissue affected by FSHD from healthy muscle.  

The DUX4 gene is located in a region of the DNA that prevents expression of this toxic gene in healthy individuals. However, the inability to silence these genes in people with FSHD causes the expression of DUX4.

The aberrant expression of the toxic DUX4 protein leads to a series of downstream events that result in skeletal muscle wasting and compromised muscle function (see Figure 12 below). Our goal is to develop AOCs containing siRNAs targeting the disease driving DUX4 mRNA, thus preventing the downstream effects in the muscle of people with FSHD.

Figure 12. FSHD is Caused by Aberrant Expression of the DUX4 Gene After Birth

The FSHD Society estimated FSHD affects approximately one in 20,000 people in the United States. A recent study conducted in the Netherlands reported a more frequent prevalence of one in 8,333 people. We believe that the patient population is between 16,000 to 38,000 in the United States. As is typical in diseases with no approved therapies, we believe that these patient population estimates are conservative.

Current Treatment Landscape and Limitations

Currently there is no cure for FSHD, and there are no therapies to treat the underlying cause of FSHD. Current treatment approaches are focused on support for activities of daily living and mobility,

18

improved functioning and lowering the risk of complications. They include physical therapy, exercise, pain management and orthopedic interventions.

Products currently in development to treat FSHD include losmapimod, a p38 MAPK inhibitor, which may modulate DUX4 expression, and is being evaluated in a Phase 2 clinical trial. Creatine monohydrate, a supplement that enhances muscle performance, is also being evaluated in a Phase 2 clinical trial. Neither of these two approaches directly target the driver of the disease, DUX4.  

Our Solution

Our AOC FSHD program consists of our proprietary mAb that is designed to bind to TfR1 conjugated with an siRNA targeted to DUX4 mRNA and is designed to be administered to the patient as an intravenous infusion. We believe that the following specific characteristics of our AOC FSHD program position it to have advantages over historical and current efforts to develop an effective therapy for people with FSHD:  

Our preclinical studies to date support our hypotheses on the potential advantages of our AOC FSHD program. We believe these data suggest that our AOC FSHD program has potential to be a disease modifying therapy for the treatment of FSHD, and may have the potential advantage of infrequent administration.  

Preclinical Data and Next Steps

DUX4 expression is extremely low, or even sporadic, in the muscles of people with FSHD. This makes DUX4 mRNA detection challenging and unreliable. Thus, in order to evaluate the activity of our DUX4 siRNAs, we took advantage of well-established DUX4 downstream-target genes and used them as surrogate biomarkers.

In vitro studies of these biomarkers in muscle cells isolated from patients with FSHD demonstrated that the expression levels of five DUX4-target genes (KHDC1L, LEUTX, MBD3L2, TRIM43, ZSCAN4) were strongly reduced following treatment with DUX4 siRNA in a concentration-dependent manner. FSHD muscle cells derived from patient samples were transfected with increasing concentrations of siRNA targeting the DUX4 mRNA. All five DUX4-target genes, as well as the FSHD composite, showed a robust reduction in their expression levels that is dependent on the DUX4 siRNA concentration. We identified several active DUX4 siRNAs that strongly decreased the expression of DUX4-target gene biomarkers in multiple muscle cells from patients with FSHD (see Figure 13 below).

19

Figure 13. DUX4-Target Genes as Biomarkers Showed Concentration-Dependent Inhibition by a DUX4 siRNA in Cultured Muscle Cells from Patients with FSHD.

We then selected the most highly active siRNAs for further screening. The full concentration response for the two selected lead DUX4 siRNAs in FSHD muscle cells demonstrated a high potency of these siRNAs. We treated cells with increasing concentrations of the two lead DUX4 siRNAs and saw a reduction in gene expression of the FSHD composite of four known biomarkers - KHDC1L, LEUTX, MBD3L2, ZSCAN4 (see Figure 14 below).

Figure 14. Potent Concentration-Dependent Reduction in DUX4 Target Gene Expression Observed with Lead siRNA candidates in Muscle Cells from Patients with FSHD.

Lead siRNA candidates showed high potency with an IC₅₀ less than one nanomolar.

Because DUX4 is not expressed in the muscles of healthy animals, we are moving forward to in vivo studies to assess target engagement and efficacy of our lead DUX4 siRNAs conjugated to anti-TfR1

20

mAb. We are doing this in the MCM-FLExDUX4 mouse model of FSHD that was engineered to express human DUX4 gene in skeletal muscle.

We are currently in the process of advancing our AOC FSHD program into IND-enabling studies. Following additional preparatory preclinical studies and regulatory clearance, we plan to advance AOC 100X into a clinical trial in 2022.

Our Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD) Program

We are developing AOCs to treat the underlying cause of DMD. DMD is caused by mutations in the gene that encodes for dystrophin, a protein critical for the normal function of muscle cells. The oligonucleotides in our AOCs are designed to promote the skipping of specific exons to allow the production of the dystrophin gene product. We are focusing our initial efforts on the development of AOCs for mutations amenable to skipping Exon 44, Exon 51 and Exon 45 and we intend to conjugate these individual oligonucleotides to our proprietary mAb targeting TfR1. In preclinical studies, we observed that treatment of an mdx mouse with an AOC caused a greater than 50-fold increase in exon skipping compared to an equimolar dose of the unconjugated oligonucleotide. We have three programs in development for DMD which target Exon 44, Exon 51 and Exon 45. We are currently in the process of advancing our first program targeting Exon 44 into IND-enabling studies. Following additional preparatory preclinical studies and regulatory clearance, we plan to commence a clinical trial for our program targeting Exon 44 in 2022.

Disease Overview

DMD is a monogenic, X-linked, recessive disease caused by mutations in the gene that encodes for dystrophin. DMD almost exclusively occurs in males and is progressive, irreversible and ultimately fatal. In people with DMD, mutations in the affected gene hinder the production of normal levels of dystrophin protein, which is needed to maintain the integrity of muscle fibers. Dystrophin protein acts as a shock absorber through its role as the foundation of the dystrophin associated glycoprotein complex, or DAPC, a group of proteins that connects the inner and outer elements of muscle cells to ensure proper muscle function. The absence of functional dystrophin leads to stresses and tears of muscle cell membranes, resulting in muscle cell death and the progressive loss of muscle function.

For people suffering from DMD, symptoms usually begin to manifest between three and five years of age. Affected people fail to reach developmental milestones or experience motor function challenges, such as difficulty walking or climbing stairs. Muscle wasting initially presents in the legs and pelvic area and later affects the muscles of the shoulders, neck and arms. As the disease progresses, people with DMD fall frequently, can no longer run, play sports or perform most daily functions, and are further weakened by physical activity. By their early teens, people with DMD typically lose their ability to walk and become dependent on a wheelchair for mobility. By their twenties, people with DMD essentially become paralyzed from the neck down and require a ventilator to breathe. Though disease severity and life expectancy vary, a patient’s quality of life dramatically decreases over time, and death typically occurs by early adulthood from either cardiac or respiratory complications.

DMD occurs in approximately one in every 3,500 to 5,000 live male births and is estimated to affect 10,000 to 15,000 people in the United States. The estimated prevalence of DMD in the European Union is similar to or higher than that in the United States. A global database analysis characterized over 7,000 genetic mutations that cause DMD. Exons 44, 51 and 45 represent approximately 30% of the total mutations observed in DMD that are amenable to skipping (see Figure 15 below).

21

Figure 15: Overview of DMD Exons Amenable to Skipping

Current Treatment Landscape and Limitations

Currently people with DMD are treated with corticosteroids to manage the inflammatory component of the disease. There are three approved unconjugated PMO-based oligonucleotide therapies, each addressing a specific mutation—eteplirsen approved for people with DMD amenable to Exon 51 skipping and golodirsen and viltolarsen for the treatment of people with DMD amenable to Exon 53 skipping. However, these drugs, in addition to requiring weekly intravenous infusions, have demonstrated a less than 6% mean increase in dystrophin in clinical trials. The FDA-approved labels for these drugs state that a clinical benefit has not yet been established and continued approval may be contingent upon the verification of such clinical benefit in confirmatory clinical trials. Ataluren is a small molecule drug, conditionally approved in the European Union, Iceland and South Korea for non-sense mutations in DMD in ambulatory people aged five years and older. However, in multiple clinical trials, ataluren failed to meet the both the primary endpoint of improvements in the six-minute walk test, as well as additional secondary outcome measures. The FDA issued a complete response letter for ataluren in October 2017, requesting additional evidence of effectiveness. Additional approaches currently in clinical development include PPMOs and gene therapy.

Our Solution

Our initial development efforts in DMD are focused on AOCs based on PMOs that can induce exon skipping specifically for Exons 44, 51 and 45 conjugated to our proprietary mAb targeting TfR1. Our lead AOC program in development for DMD targets Exon 44. We believe that our AOCs have the potential to increase the production of dystrophin in people with DMD for two reasons. First, because of recent advances in the understanding of the splicing process and placement of skipping agents on pre-mRNA described in published literature and based on these advances, we have screened for and identified PMOs with optimized skipping activity. Second, the mAb targeting TfR1 allows for more efficient delivery to muscle cells, therefore allowing for better uptake of the PMO. In preclinical studies, we also observed that our TfR1-based AOCs induced exon skipping in cardiac muscle, which we believe may address some of the cardiomyopathies in people with DMD, a key complication of the disease. Based on their mechanism of action, we believe that our AOCs could have utility in several additional DMD mutations beyond these first three.

Preclinical Data and Next Steps

In an mdx mouse model of DMD, a widely accepted mouse model in DMD, we observed that conjugating an oligonucleotide designed to bind to a specific exon can induce exon skipping and production of dystrophin protein more efficiently than unconjugated oligonucleotides. Fourteen days following treatment with a single 8mg/kg dose of a mouse Exon 23-targeting PMO conjugated to a mouse-specific-

22

mAb targeting TfR1, we observed an approximately 50-fold increase in the degree of splice switching as compared to an equimolar dose of the unconjugated PMO (see Figure 16 below).

Figure 16: AOC Treatment Exon Skipping

Compared to an Unconjugated Oligonucleotide in Mouse DMD Model

In the gastrocnemius of mdx mice treated with varying doses of the AOC, we observed near-maximum benefit at concentrations of approximately 50-100 nM, providing us with a framework for establishing target concentration in clinical trials (see Figure 17 below). We further observed that administering the PMO conjugated to a control non-binding mAb failed to increase splice skipping to the same degree as conjugating the same oligonucleotide to the mAb targeting TfR1 (see Figure 17 below), despite achieving concentrations of PMO in the muscle in the active range of 50-100 nM. The absence of meaningful skipping with a non-targeting mAb demonstrated that non-specific uptake is inefficient compared to receptor-mediated uptake associated with the mAb targeting TfR1. We have also observed that TfR1-based AOCs induce exon skipping in cardiac muscle, which we believe may address some of the cardiomyopathies in people with DMD.

Figure 17: Exon Skipping versus Concentration After Treatment

with a TfR1 mAb AOC or Control mAb AOC

The PMO conjugated to a non-targeting mAb (black square) allowed for uptake into muscle, but skipping was substantially less compared to the TfR1 targeted AOC.

23

In a preclinical study of human primary myocytes incubated with two different unconjugated PMOs (44 Seq 5 and 44 Seq 7), we observed substantial skipping of Exon 44 of dystrophin (see Figure 18 below).

Figure 18: Dystrophin Skipping with Lead Candidates for Exon 44

We are currently in the process of advancing our lead AOC DMD program targeting Exon 44 into IND-enabling studies. Following additional preparatory preclinical studies and regulatory clearance, we plan to advance our program targeting Exon 44 into a clinical trial in 2022.

Our Muscle Atrophy Program

We are in the process of evaluating multiple disease models of muscle atrophy to identify an optimal development path in rare disease indications and/or in diseases that impact large patient populations. Our AOC targeting muscle atrophy will consist of our proprietary mAb targeting TfR1 conjugated with an siRNA designed to downregulate the expression of MuRF1 RNA. By targeting MuRF1, a muscle-specific ubiquitin ligase, or E3 ligase, that has been shown by third parties to be upregulated upon induction of muscle atrophy, we are developing a solution employing common effectors of both the catabolic and anabolic pathways associated with the degradation of protein in muscle cells. While several historical attempts at developing a therapy to treat muscle atrophy have failed, those attempts followed a different approach than we are taking. In preclinical studies, we observed that a single 3 mg/kg dose of the siRNA in our AOC resulted in a greater than 50% reduction of MuRF1 in gastrocnemius skeletal muscle for over 20 weeks. The strength and scope of emerging data over this period will inform our view on ideal indications to pursue for advanced development and therefore, also our decision on the most appropriate future development path for our muscle atrophy product candidate.

Disease Overview

Muscle atrophy is the loss of skeletal muscle mass that leads to muscle weakness and physical disability. Muscle atrophy can be caused by immobility, aging, malnutrition, medications, or a wide range of injuries or diseases that impact the musculoskeletal or nervous system. Examples of diseases that cause muscle atrophy include those characterized by large patient populations such as cachexia, as well as many rare genetic muscle diseases.

Muscle atrophy is caused by a change in the balance between catabolic (protein breakdown) and anabolic (protein synthesis) signals that activate pro-inflammatory cytokine pathways that induce protein degradation or inhibit growth factor pathways that promote protein synthesis, respectively (see Figure 19 below). Genetic profiling of atrophic muscles has identified a group of E3 ligases that are upregulated upon induction of muscle atrophy. Of these, the muscle-specific E3 ligase MuRF1 has been shown to be upregulated in most in vivo models, as well as in clinical trials. Inhibiting MuRF1 expression diminishes the impact from the pro inflammatory factor side of the pathway and diminishes the growth-inhibiting effects of

24

the growth factor pathway (see Figure 19 below). Furthermore, genetic ablation of MuRF1 in mice has been shown by third parties to render muscles partially resistant to muscle atrophy.

Figure 19: Pathways for the Induction of Muscle Atrophy

The prevalence of muscle atrophy is widespread, spanning multiple diseases and conditions. Cachexia, a muscle wasting syndrome caused by an underlying disease such as cancer, is estimated to affect 50% to 80% of all cancer patients, and contributes to a significant portion of all cancer deaths.

Current Treatment Landscape and Limitations

Current treatments for muscle atrophy primarily focus on nutritional intake and physical exercise. Historically, attempts to develop a therapy addressing the underlying disease have included anti-inflammatory agents and drugs that either activate protein synthesis (including myostatin inhibitors) or inhibit protein degradation. None of these approaches have been successful in clinical trials. We believe that these approaches failed in clinical trials because they focused on single pathways and on the regulation of either catabolic or anabolic mechanisms. Muscle atrophy involves multiple pathways and the simultaneous activation and inhibition of catabolic and anabolic mechanisms, respectively. Contrary to previous attempts, by targeting E3 ligases such as MuRF1, we are regulating common effectors of both the catabolic and anabolic pathways involved in the induction of muscle atrophy.

Preclinical Data and Next Steps

In a commonly used model of muscle atrophy (denervation), pre-treatment of mice with an AOC comprised of the mouse mAb targeting TfR1 conjugated with an siRNA targeted against MuRF1 (at 6 mg/kg) showed a 54% sparing of muscle cross sectional area, or CSA, on Day 28 after dosing (see left panel of Figure 20 below) and 35% sparing of weight (see right panel of Figure 20 below) on Day 17 compared to mice treated with an AOC with a control siRNA. The results of this study replicate data from the same model in mice with MuRF1 genetically ablated.

25

Figure 20: Impact of Downregulation of MuRF1 on Denervation-Induced Muscle Atrophy in Mice

We are in the process of evaluating multiple disease models of muscle atrophy to identify an optimal development path in rare disease indications and/or in diseases that impact large patient populations. Following additional preparatory preclinical studies and regulatory clearance, we plan to advance our product candidate into a clinical trial for muscle atrophy.

 The strength and scope of emerging data over this period will inform our view on ideal indications to pursue and the most appropriate future development path for our muscle atrophy product candidate. Should we determine that we are pursuing muscle atrophy associated with certain rare diseases, we will likely retain rights for later stage development and potential commercialization. Should we find that we are pursuing diseases underpinned by large patient populations, we may elect to leverage the resources or specific expertise of another biopharmaceutical company via a strategic collaboration.

Our Pompe Disease Program

Pompe disease is a rare, autosomal recessive lysosomal storage disease caused by a mutation in the gene that encodes for GAA that results in the buildup of glycogen in the body’s cells. The accumulation of glycogen in certain organs and tissues, especially muscles, impairs normal tissue and organ function. People with Pompe disease experience serious muscle-related problems, including progressive muscle weakness, especially in the legs, trunk and diaphragm. As the disorder progresses, breathing problems can lead to respiratory failure. To date, more than 300 mutations have been identified in GAA that are pathogenic in nature. In general, GAA enzyme activity correlates with the age of onset and rate of progression. Pompe disease affects an estimated one in 40,000 people in the United States, ranging from one in 14,000 in African Americans to one in 100,000 in individuals of European decent. Pompe disease is estimated to affect between 5,000 and 10,000 people worldwide.

The only approved therapy for Pompe disease is Lumizyme, a form of enzyme replacement therapy, or ERT, known as Myozyme outside of the United States, which is delivered by bi-weekly intravenous infusion. However, ERT does not adequately address the breakdown of muscle tissue associated with the disease. We are also aware of gene therapies in clinical development designed to increase GAA levels in patients.

Our program in Pompe disease utilizes an AOC based on our mAb that targets TfR1 to deliver an siRNA targeting the mRNA encoding GYS1, a protein required for the synthesis of glycogen in muscle. Reducing glycogen synthesis in muscle will reduce the toxic accumulation of glycogen in the disease. We believe that an siRNA-based approach is well suited to the treatment of Pompe disease because we have identified a specific GYS1 inhibitor that does not inhibit glycogen synthetase 2, the closely related liver form of the enzyme, the latter being critical to glucose regulation in the body. We believe that our approach to address the breakdown of muscle tissue associated with Pompe disease may be complementary to ERT, as well as future gene therapies.

26

Opportunities in Immunology and Other Areas

We intend to pursue the development of AOCs in other tissue and cell types, including immune cells. In the field of immunology, we believe AOCs have the potential to target a broader set of cell types and diseases than traditional oligonucleotide therapies. We believe oligonucleotide therapies have the potential to address the challenges of immune responses at the RNA level; however, the ability to modulate immune responses has been hampered by the inappropriate delivery of these agents to immune cells. By identifying and optimizing antibodies for specific immune cells, our goal is to leverage our AOC platform to develop product candidates that can deliver siRNAs to disease-driving subsets of immune cells.

In studies designed to explore AOCs in immuno-oncology, we observed significant AOC-mediated mRNA reduction in CD8+ tumor infiltrating lymphocytes, or TILs, in vivo in the syngeneic CT-26 tumor model with an intravenous dose of 6 mg/kg siRNA. However, we observed that the AOCs had no effect on the mRNA levels in T or B cells in the spleen (see Figure 21 below), suggesting that activity can be limited to only the cell populations involved in immune-responses to tumors without affecting lymphocytes outside the tumor. We believe this specificity was driven by the fact that the AOC employed our mAb targeting TfR1, and TfR1 is over expressed only on activated lymphocytes. We also observed significant AOC-mediated mRNA reduction in CD4+ TILs and T-regs from mice treated with an AOC comprised of a mAb targeting TfR1 and an siRNA targeting SHP2.

Figure 21: Target mRNA Levels in CD8+ TILs, Splenic T Cells and Splenic B Cells from Mice Treated in vivo with an AOC

We have also identified a mAb that binds to macrophages specifically, and when conjugated with an siRNA, produces reduction in levels of the target mRNA in that cell both in vitro and in vivo. We believe this finding supports the development of AOCs for diseases where macrophages play a significant role, like autoimmune disorders. We are in the process of generating data to demonstrate the pharmacologic effects of siRNA reduction in animal models of immune disorders, which will help inform our future development plans. Our internal efforts are focused on finding additional surface protein-mAb pairs and demonstrating reduction in the expression of key targets in subsets of immune cells. As we identify appropriate product candidates in immunology, we may choose to advance these on our own or seek a strategic collaborator based on the nature of potential indications. Our findings in immunology served as one of the key bases of our collaboration with Lilly who has access to a defined set of up to six mRNA targets initially in immunology and other select indications on a worldwide basis.

Beyond immune cells, we plan to continue to invest in our AOC platform to explore the full potential of our AOCs in cardiomyopathies, as well as in additional previously inaccessible tissue and cell types. We have recently entered into a collaboration with MyoKardia that will help us expand our therapeutic activities to include cardiac-specific indications. Our goal is to discover, develop and commercialize novel AOC therapeutics that overcome current barriers to the delivery of oligonucleotides and unlock their potential to treat a wide range of serious diseases currently lacking adequate treatment options.

27

Manufacturing

We do not own or operate manufacturing facilities. We currently rely on third-party manufacturers and suppliers for the antibodies, oligonucleotides and linkers used to make our AOCs, and we expect to continue to do so to meet our preclinical, clinical and commercial activities. Our third-party manufacturers are required to manufacture our product candidates under current Good Manufacturing Practice, or cGMP, requirements and other applicable laws and regulations. We believe there are multiple sources for all of the materials required for the manufacture of our product candidates.

Competition

The biotechnology and biopharmaceutical industries are characterized by rapid technological advancement, significant competition and an emphasis on intellectual property. We face potential competition from many different sources, including major pharmaceutical, specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic institutions, governmental agencies, and public and private research institutions. Any product candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize will compete with current therapies and new therapies that may become available in the future.

With respect to AOC 1001, there are currently no approved therapies to treat the underlying cause of DM1. Products currently in development to treat DM1 include: tideglusib, a GSK3-ß inhibitor in late-stage clinical development by AMO Pharma for the congenital phenotype of DM1; AT466, which is an AAV-antisense candidate in preclinical development by Audentes Therapeutics, Inc.; an antibody linked oligonucleotide in preclinical development by Dyne Therapeutics Inc.; gene editing treatments in preclinical development by Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; an RNA-targeting gene therapy in preclinical development by Locana, Inc.; and small molecules interacting with RNA in preclinical development by Expansion Therapeutics. There are a growing number of companies pursuing different paths to treat DM1 and we expect that the space will continue to evolve as additional candidates advance.

There are currently no therapies to treat the underlying cause of FSHD. Products currently in development to treat FSHD include: creatine monohydrate, a supplement that enhances muscle performance, which is being evaluated in a Phase 2 clinical trial by Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, and losmapimod, a p38 MAPK inhibitor that may modulate DUX4 expression, which is being evaluated in a Phase 2 clinical trial by Fulcrum Therapeutics Inc.

Currently people with DMD are treated with corticosteroids to manage the inflammatory component of the disease. Deflazacort is an FDA approved corticosteroid marketed by PTC Therapeutics, Inc. In addition, there are three FDA approved exon skipping drugs marketed by Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc.: Eteplirsen, an unconjugated PMO approved for people with DMD amenable to skipping Exon 51; golodirsen for the treatment of people with DMD amenable to skipping Exon 53; and casimersen for the treatment of DMD in patients with a confirmed mutation amenable to exon 45 skipping.  There is an FDA-approved exon skipping drug marketed by Nippon Shinyaku Co., Inc.: viltolarsen, an unconjugated PMO approved for people with DMD amenable to skipping Exon 53. Companies focused on developing treatments for DMD that target dystrophin mechanisms, as does our DMD program, include Sarepta Therapeutics with SRP-5051, a PPMO currently being evaluated in a Phase 2 clinical trial for patients amenable to Exon 51 skipping 51, and PTC Therapeutics with ataluren, a small molecule targeting nonsense mutations in a Phase 3 clinical trial. In addition, several companies are developing gene therapies, including Milo Biotechnology (AAV1-FS344), Pfizer (PF-06939926), Sarepta Therapeutics (SRP-9001 and Galgt2 gene therapy program), and Solid Biosciences Inc. (SGT-001). We are also aware of several companies targeting non-dystrophin mechanisms for the treatment of DMD.

Current treatments for muscle atrophy are primarily focused on nutritional intake and physical exercise. Other products in developments for muscle atrophy in cachexia include: adlumiz and AEZS-130, which are ghrelin agonists in a Phase 3 clinical trial by Helsinn Healthcare SA and a Phase 2 trial by Aeterna Zentaris Inc., respectively; GSK2881078, an androgen receptor modulator in Phase 2 clinical in development by GlaxoSmithKline plc; NGM120, a GSF15 inhibitor by NGM Biopharmaceuticals Inc.; and PF-06946860 in Phase 1 clinical development by Pfizer Inc.

28

The only approved therapy for Pompe disease is Lumizyme (known as Myozyme outside of the United States), an ERT delivered by bi-weekly intravenous infusion, and marketed by Sanofi Genzyme. We are aware of multiple ERT therapies in clinical development, including AT-GAA, which uses a pharmacological chaperone, in a Phase 3 clinical trial by Amicus Therapeutics, Inc., and neoGAA in a Phase 3 clinical trial by Sanofi Genzyme. In addition, several companies are developing gene therapies, including Actus Therapeutics, Inc. (ACTUS101), Asklepios BioPharmaceutical, Inc. (AAV2/8-LSPhGAA), Audentes Therapeutics (AT845) and Spark Therapeutics, Inc. (SPK-3006).

We will also compete more generally with other companies developing alternative scientific and technological approaches, including other companies working to develop conjugates with oligonucleotides for extra-hepatic delivery, including Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Aro Biotherapeutics, Arrowhead Therapeutics, Dyne Therapeutics, Ionis Pharmaceuticals and Sarepta Therapeutics, as well as gene therapy and CRISPR approaches.

Many of our competitors, either alone or with strategic partners, have substantially greater financial, technical and human resources than we do. Accordingly, our competitors may be more successful than us in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining approval for treatments and achieving widespread market acceptance, rendering our treatments obsolete or non-competitive. Merger and acquisition activity in the biotechnology and biopharmaceutical industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. These companies also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel, establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials and acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. Our commercial opportunity could be substantially limited if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are more effective, safer, less toxic, more convenient or less expensive than our comparable products. In geographies that are critical to our commercial success, competitors may also obtain regulatory approvals before us, resulting in our competitors building a strong market position in advance of the entry of our products. In addition, our ability to compete may be affected in many cases by insurers or other third-party payors seeking to encourage the use of other drugs. The key competitive factors affecting the success of our programs are likely to be their efficacy, safety profile, convenience, level of promotional activity, intellectual property protection and availability of reimbursement.

Intellectual Property

We strive to protect our product candidates and our AOC product platform through a variety of methods, including seeking and maintaining patents intended to cover our AOC product platform, our products and compositions, their methods of use and processes for their manufacture, and any other inventions that are commercially important to the development of our business. We also rely on know-how, continuing technological innovation and in-licensing opportunities to develop and maintain our proprietary position. We also rely on trade secrets and know-how that may be important to the development of our business. We seek to obtain domestic and international patent protection and endeavor to promptly file patent applications for new commercially valuable inventions to expand our intellectual property portfolio.

We believe that we have a significant global intellectual property position and substantial know-how relating to our AOC product candidates and our technology platform. As of December 31, 2020, our intellectual property portfolio consisted of two issued U.S. patents and over 20 pending U.S. patent applications that we own. Collectively, these patent rights relate to various aspects of our AOC product candidates and technology platform. In addition, we have an exclusive option to an exclusive license to certain patent rights from the University of Alberta. In addition to filing and prosecuting patent applications in the United States, we often file counterpart patent applications in additional countries where we believe such foreign filing is likely to be beneficial, including Australia, Canada, China, Europe, Hong Kong, Israel, Japan, Mexico, Singapore, and South Korea. We also file patent applications pursuant to the Patent Cooperation Treaty, or PCT. Our PCT patent applications are in the first phase of the PCT process, which is the international phase, in which patent protection is pending under a single patent application filed with the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, as a contracting state of the PCT. These PCT

29

patent applications have not yet entered the second phase of the PCT process, which is the national and regional phase, in which rights are continued by filing necessary documents with the patent offices of separate contracting states of the PCT. The national phase of the PCT patent application process occurs 30 months after the earliest priority date of the PCT patent application.

We continually assess and refine our intellectual property strategy as we develop new product candidates and platform technologies. To that end, we are prepared to file additional patent applications in any appropriate fields if our intellectual property strategy requires such filings, or where we seek to adapt to competition or seize business opportunities. Further, we are prepared to file patent applications, as we consider appropriate under the circumstances, relating to the new technologies that we develop.

We cannot be sure that patents will be granted with respect to any of our pending patent applications or with respect to any patent applications we may own or license in the future, nor can we be sure that any of our existing patents or any patents we may own or license in the future will be useful in protecting our technology. Please see “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property” for additional information on the risks associated with our intellectual property strategy and portfolio.

Intellectual Property Relating to AOC 1001

With regard to AOC 1001, as of December 31, 2020, we owned one pending U.S. patent application and one pending patent application filed pursuant to the PCT. An additional patent was issued in January 2021. These patent rights relate to AOC 1001 composition of matter, formulations containing AOC 1001, methods of manufacturing, and methods of treating diseases, using AOC 1001. Any patents issued from these applications are expected to expire in 2038-2041; however, a patent term extension may be available.

Intellectual Property Relating to Our FSHD AOC Product Candidate

With regard to our FSHD AOC product candidate, as of December 31, 2020 we owned one pending U.S. patent application. These patent rights relate to the FSHD AOC composition of matter, formulations containing the FSHD AOC, methods of manufacturing, and methods of treating diseases, using our FSHD AOC. Any patents issued from these applications are expected to expire in 2041; however, a patent term extension may be available.

Intellectual Property Relating to Our DMD AOC Product Candidates

With regard to our DMD AOC product candidates, as of December 31, 2020, we owned three pending U.S. patent applications and 19 pending patent applications in various countries and regions including Australia, Canada, China, Europe, Hong Kong, Israel, Japan, Mexico, Singapore, and South Korea. These patent rights relate to the DMD AOCs composition of matter, formulations containing the DMD AOCs, methods of manufacturing, and methods of treating diseases, using our DMD AOCs. Any patents issued from these applications are expected to expire in 2038; however, a patent term extension may be available.

Intellectual Property Relating to Our Muscle Atrophy AOC Product Candidate

With regard to our muscle atrophy AOC product candidate, as of December 31, 2020 we owned one pending U.S. patent application and one pending PCT patent application. These patent rights relate to the muscle atrophy AOC composition of matter, formulations containing the muscle atrophy AOC, methods of manufacturing, and methods of treating diseases, using our muscle atrophy AOC. Any patents issued from these applications are expected to expire in 2038; however, a patent term extension may be available.

Intellectual Property Relating to Our Pompe AOC Product Candidate

With regard to our Pompe AOC product candidate, as of December 31, 2020, we owned one pending U.S. patent application. This application relates to the Pompe disease AOC composition of matter, formulations containing the Pompe disease AOC, methods of manufacturing, and method of treating diseases, using our Pompe disease AOC. Any patents issued from this application are expected to expire in 2041; however, a patent term extension may be available.

30

Intellectual Property Relating to Our AOC Product Platform

As of December 31, 2020, we owned 14 families of U.S. and foreign patents and patent applications generally covering our AOC product platform. These families include two issued U.S. patents, 14 pending U.S. patent applications, three PCT patent applications and 24 foreign patent applications in the European Patent Office, Australia, Canada, China, Israel, Hong Kong, Japan, South Korea, Mexico, Singapore, and Taiwan, relating to key aspects and components of our AOC product platform systems. Our patent applications contain claims covering (i) proprietary antibodies; (ii) proprietary oligonucleotide chemical structures; (iii) proprietary oligonucleotide sequences; (iv) proprietary AOC structures; and (v) methods for manufacturing and using our AOC technologies. Some of these AOC platform cases generically cover our various product candidates. The issued U.S. patents and any U.S. patents issuing from our pending U.S. patent applications are expected to expire between 2037 and 2040.

The term of individual patents depends upon the laws of the countries in which they are obtained. In most countries in which we file, the patent term is 20 years from the earliest date of filing of a non-provisional patent application. However, the term of United States patents may be extended for delays incurred due to compliance with the FDA requirements or by delays encountered during prosecution that are caused by the USPTO. For example, for drugs that are regulated by the FDA under the Hatch-Waxman Act, it is permitted to extend the term of a patent that covers such drug for up to five years beyond the normal expiration date of the patent. In the future, if and when our biopharmaceutical product candidates receive FDA approval, we expect to apply for patent term extensions on patents covering those product candidates. We intend to seek patent term extensions to any of our issued patents in any jurisdiction where these are available; however, there is no guarantee that the applicable authorities, including the USPTO and FDA, will agree with our assessment of whether such extensions should be granted, and even if granted, the length of such extensions. If patents are issued on our pending patent applications, the resulting patents are projected to expire on dates ranging from 2038 to 2041, unless we receive patent term extension or patent term adjustment, or both.

However, the actual protection afforded by a patent varies on a product-by-product basis, from country-to-country, and depends upon many factors, including the type of patent, the scope of its coverage, the availability of regulatory-related extensions, the availability of legal remedies in a particular country and the validity and enforceability of the patent.

The patent positions of companies like ours are generally uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions. No consistent policy regarding the scope of claims allowable in patents in the field of oligonucleotide therapy has emerged in the United States. The patent situation outside of the United States is even more uncertain. Changes in the patent laws and rules, either by legislation, judicial decisions, or regulatory interpretation in the United States and other countries may diminish our ability to protect our inventions and enforce our intellectual property rights, and more generally could affect the value of our intellectual property. In particular, our ability to stop third parties from making, using, selling, offering to sell, importing or otherwise commercializing any of our patented inventions, either directly or indirectly, will depend in part on our success in obtaining, defending and enforcing patent claims that cover our technology, inventions, and improvements. With respect to both licensed and company-owned intellectual property, we cannot be sure that patents will be granted with respect to any of our pending patent applications or with respect to any patent applications filed by us in the future, nor can we be sure that any of our existing patents or any patents that may be granted to us in the future will be commercially useful in protecting our platform and product candidates and the methods used to manufacture them. Moreover, our issued patents and those that may issue in the future may not guarantee us the right to practice our technology in relation to the commercialization of our platform’s product candidates. The area of patent and other intellectual property rights in biotechnology is an evolving one with many risks and uncertainties, and third parties may have blocking patents that could be used to prevent us from commercializing our AOC product platform and product candidates and practicing our proprietary technology. Our issued patents and those that may issue in the future may be challenged, narrowed, circumvented or invalidated, which could limit our ability to stop competitors from marketing related platforms or product candidates or limit the length of the term of patent protection that we may have for our AOC product platform and product candidates. In addition, the rights granted under any issued patents may not provide us with protection or competitive

31

advantages against competitors with similar technology. Furthermore, our competitors may independently develop similar technologies. For these reasons, we may have competition for our AOC product platform and product candidates. Moreover, because of the extensive time required for development, testing and regulatory review of a potential product, it is possible that before any product candidate can be commercialized, any related patent may expire or remain in force for only a short period following commercialization, thereby reducing any advantage of the patent. For this and other risks related to our proprietary technology, inventions, improvements, platforms and product candidates, please see the section entitled “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property.”

We intend to file applications for trademark registrations in connection with our product candidates in various jurisdictions, including the United States. We have filed for trademark protection of the Avidity Biosciences mark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office and foreign patent and trademark organizations.

We also rely on trade secret protection for our confidential and proprietary information. Although we take steps to protect our confidential and proprietary information as trade secrets, including through contractual means with our employees, consultants, outside scientific collaborators, sponsored researchers and other advisors, third parties may independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary information and techniques or otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or disclose our technology. Thus, we may not be able to meaningfully protect our trade secrets. It is our policy to require our employees, consultants, outside scientific collaborators, sponsored researchers and other advisors to execute confidentiality agreements under the commencement of employment or consulting relationships with us. These agreements provide that all confidential information concerning our business or financial affairs developed or made known to the individual during the individual’s relationship with us is to be kept confidential and not disclosed to third parties except in specific circumstances. In the case of employees, the agreements provide that all inventions conceived by the individual, and which are related to our current or planned business or research and development or made during normal working hours, on our premises or using our equipment or proprietary information, are our exclusive property. In many cases our confidentiality and other agreements with consultants, outside scientific collaborators, sponsored researchers and other advisors require them to assign or grant us licenses to inventions they invent as a result of the work or services they render under such agreements or grant us an option to negotiate a license to use such inventions. Despite these efforts, we cannot provide any assurances that all such agreements have been duly executed, and any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose our proprietary information, and we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for such breaches.

We also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our proprietary technology and processes by maintaining physical security of our premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems. Although we have confidence in these individuals, organizations and systems, agreements or security measures may be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies for any breach. To the extent that our employees, contractors, consultants, collaborators and advisors use intellectual property owned by others in their work for us, disputes may arise as to the rights in relation to the resulting know-how or inventions. For more information, please see the section entitled “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property.”

Research Collaboration and License Agreement with Lilly

In April 2019, we entered into the Lilly Agreement with Lilly for the discovery, development and commercialization of antibody-oligonucleotide conjugate products, or Products, in immunology and other select indications on a worldwide basis. Under the Lilly Agreement, the parties will collaborate on preclinical research and discovery activities for Products and Lilly will be responsible for funding the cost of preclinical research and discovery activities of both parties for all Products. Lilly will lead the clinical development, regulatory approval and commercialization of all Products, at Lilly’s sole cost.

Under the Lilly Agreement, we granted Lilly an exclusive, worldwide, royalty-bearing license under our technology to research, develop, manufacture, and sell Products directed to up to six mRNA targets. Lilly has the right to sublicense its rights under the Lilly Agreement subject to certain conditions. Lilly granted

32

us a non-exclusive license under certain Lilly technology solely to conduct research under the Lilly Agreement. We retain the right to use our technology to perform our obligations under the Lilly Agreement and for all purposes not granted to Lilly. We agreed that we will not, ourselves or with a third party, research, develop, manufacture or commercialize or otherwise exploit any compound or product directed against targets subject to the collaboration.

Lilly paid us an upfront license fee of $20.0 million, and we are eligible to receive up to $60.0 million in development milestone payments, up to $140.0 million in regulatory milestone payments and up to $205.0 million in commercialization milestone payments per target. In addition, Lilly is obligated to pay us a tiered royalty ranging from the mid-single to low-double digits on worldwide annual net sales of licensed Products, subject to specified and capped reductions for the market entry of biosimilar products, loss of patent coverage of licensed Products and for payments owed to third parties for additional rights necessary to commercialize licensed Products in the territory. Lilly’s royalty obligations and the Lilly Agreement will expire on a licensed Product-by-licensed Product and country-by-country basis on the later of ten years from the date of the first commercial sale or when there is no longer a valid patent claim covering such licensed Product in such country.

The Lilly Agreement may be terminated either by us or Lilly in the event of an uncured material breach by the other party. Lilly may terminate the Lilly Agreement on a target-by-target basis or in its entirety without cause, subject to certain limitations, including that Lilly may not terminate the Lilly Agreement on a target-by-target basis within the first three years of the effective date of the Lilly Agreement if doing so would reduce the number of Products subject to the collaboration to fewer than a certain number. In the event either party commences a legal action challenging the validity or enforceability of any licensed patents, the other party will have the right to terminate the Lilly Agreement with respect to the challenged patents.

The Lilly Agreement includes various representations, warranties, covenants, dispute resolution mechanisms, indemnities and other provisions customary for transactions of this nature.

Concurrently with the Lilly Agreement, we issued a convertible promissory note to Lilly, or the Lilly Note, and received cash proceeds of $15.0 million. The Lilly Note accrued simple interest of 8.0% per annum and converted into shares of our Series C convertible preferred stock in November 2019.

Research Collaboration with Myokardia, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bristol Myers Squibb

In December 2020, we entered into a research collaboration with MyoKardia, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bristol Myers Squibb, to demonstrate the potential utility of AOCs in cardiac tissue by leveraging MyoKardia’s genetic cardiomyopathy platform including, among other aspects, its novel target discovery engine and proprietary cardiac disease models.

Government Regulation

Government authorities in the United States, at the federal, state and local level, and other countries extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, approval, labeling, packaging, storage, record-keeping, promotion, advertising, distribution, marketing and export and import of products such as those we are developing. A new drug must be approved by the FDA through the new drug application, or NDA, process before it may be legally marketed in the United States.

We believe our AOC product candidates may be subject to regulation in the United States as combination products. If marketed individually, each component of our product candidates would be subject to different regulatory pathways and would require approval of independent marketing applications by the FDA. A combination product, however, is assigned to an FDA center that will have primary jurisdiction over its regulation based on a determination of the combination product’s primary mode of action, which is the single mode of action that provides the most important therapeutic effect. In the case of our AOC product candidates, we believe that the primary mode of action is attributable to the drug component of the product. Accordingly, we believe the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, or CDER, will have primary jurisdiction over premarket development of our product candidates. We expect to seek approval of AOC

33

1001 and each of our other AOC product candidates through submission of a single NDA reviewed by CDER, and we do not expect that the FDA will require a separate marketing authorization for each constituent of AOC 1001 or our other AOC product candidates.

U.S. Drug Development Process

In the United States, the FDA regulates drugs under the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or the FDCA, and its implementing regulations. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Failure to comply with the applicable U.S. requirements at any time during the product development process, approval process or after approval may subject an applicant to administrative or judicial sanctions. These sanctions could include the FDA’s refusal to approve pending applications, withdrawal of an approval, a clinical hold, warning letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, restitution, disgorgement or civil or criminal penalties. Any agency or judicial enforcement action could have a material adverse effect on us.

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

Once a pharmaceutical candidate is identified for development, it enters the preclinical testing stage. Preclinical tests include laboratory evaluations of product chemistry, toxicity and formulation, as well as animal studies. An IND sponsor must submit the results of the preclinical tests, together with manufacturing information and analytical data, to the FDA as part of the IND. An IND is a request for authorization from the FDA to administer an investigational new drug product to humans. The sponsor will also include a protocol detailing, among other things, the objectives of the first phase of the clinical trial, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety, and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated, if the first phase lends itself to an efficacy evaluation. Some preclinical testing may continue even after the IND is submitted. An IND must become effective before human clinical trials may begin. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA, within the 30-day time period, places the clinical trial on a clinical hold. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin. Clinical holds also may be imposed by the FDA at any time before or during clinical trials due to safety concerns about ongoing or proposed clinical trials or non-compliance with specific FDA requirements, and the trials may not begin or continue until the FDA notifies the sponsor that the hold

34

has been lifted. Submission of an IND therefore may or may not result in FDA authorization to begin a clinical trial.

Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational product to human subjects under the supervision of one or more qualified investigators in accordance with GCP regulations, which include the requirement that all research subjects provide their informed consent in writing for their participation in any clinical trial. They must be conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the trial, dosing procedures, subject selection and exclusion criteria and the safety and effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. Each protocol must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND as well as any subsequent protocol amendments, and timely safety reports must be submitted to the FDA and the investigators for serious and unexpected adverse events. An IRB at each institution participating in the clinical trial must review and approve each protocol before a clinical trial commences at that institution and must also approve the information regarding the trial and the consent form that must be provided to each trial subject or his or her legal representative, monitor the study until completed and otherwise comply with IRB regulations.

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

Post-approval trials, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 studies, may be conducted after initial marketing approval. These trials are used to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication. In certain instances, the FDA may mandate the performance of Phase 4 clinical trials as a condition of approval of an NDA.

The FDA or the sponsor may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research subjects or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an IRB can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical trial at its institution if the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements or if the drug has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients. In addition, some clinical trials are overseen by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the sponsor, known as a data safety monitoring board or committee. Depending on its charter, this group may determine whether a trial may move forward at designated check points based on access to certain data from the trial.

During the development of a new drug, sponsors are given opportunities to meet with the FDA at certain points. These points may be prior to submission of an IND, at the end of Phase 2, and before an NDA is submitted. Meetings at other times may be requested. These meetings can provide an opportunity for the sponsor to share information about the data gathered to date, for the FDA to provide advice, and for the sponsor and the FDA to reach agreement on the next phase of development. Sponsors typically use

35

the meetings at the end of the Phase 2 trial to discuss Phase 2 clinical results and present plans for the pivotal Phase 3 clinical trials that they believe will support approval of the new drug.

Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional animal studies and must also develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the drug and finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and, among other things, the manufacturer must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the final drug. In addition, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life.

While the IND is active and before approval, progress reports summarizing the results of the clinical trials and nonclinical studies performed since the last progress report must be submitted at least annually to the FDA, and written IND safety reports must be submitted to the FDA and investigators for serious and unexpected suspected adverse events, findings from other studies suggesting a significant risk to humans exposed to the same or similar drugs, findings from animal or in vitro testing suggesting a significant risk to humans, and any clinically important increased incidence of a serious suspected adverse reaction compared to that listed in the protocol or investigator brochure.

There are also requirements governing the reporting of ongoing clinical trials and completed trial results to public registries. Sponsors of certain clinical trials of FDA-regulated products are required to register and disclose specified clinical trial information, which is publicly available at www.clinicaltrials.gov. Information related to the product, patient population, phase of investigation, trial sites and investigators and other aspects of the clinical trial is then made public as part of the registration. Sponsors are also obligated to discuss the results of their clinical trials after completion. Disclosure of the results of these trials can be delayed until the new product or new indication being studied has been approved.

NDA Review and Approval Process

Assuming successful completion of all required testing in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements, the results of product development, preclinical and other non-clinical studies and clinical trials, along with descriptions of the manufacturing process, analytical tests conducted on the chemistry of the drug, proposed labeling and other relevant information are submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA requesting approval to market the product. The submission of an NDA is subject to the payment of substantial user fees; a waiver of such fees may be obtained under certain limited circumstances. Additionally, no user fees are assessed on NDAs for products designated as orphan drugs, unless the product also includes a non-orphan indication.

The FDA reviews an NDA to determine, among other things, whether a product is safe and effective for its intended use and whether its manufacturing is cGMP-compliant to assure and preserve the product’s identity, strength, quality and purity. Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, or PDUFA, guidelines that are currently in effect, the FDA has a goal of ten months from the date of “filing” of a standard NDA for a new molecular entity to review and act on the submission. This review typically takes twelve months from the date the NDA is submitted to FDA because the FDA has approximately two months to make a “filing” decision after it the application is submitted. The FDA conducts a preliminary review of all NDAs within the first 60 days after submission, before accepting them for filing, to determine whether they are sufficiently complete to permit substantive review The FDA may request additional information rather than accept an NDA for filing. In this event, the NDA must be resubmitted with the additional information. The resubmitted application also is subject to review before the FDA accepts it for filing.

The FDA may refer an application for a novel drug to an advisory committee. An advisory committee is a panel of independent experts, including clinicians and other scientific experts, that reviews, evaluates and provides a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and under what conditions. The FDA is not bound by the recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations carefully when making decisions. Before approving an NDA, the FDA will inspect the

36

facility or facilities where the product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve an application unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with cGMP requirements and adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. Additionally, before approving an NDA, the FDA may inspect one or more clinical trial sites to assure compliance with GCP requirements. If the FDA determines that the application, manufacturing process or manufacturing facilities are not acceptable, it will outline the deficiencies in the submission and often will request additional testing or information. Notwithstanding the submission of any requested additional information, the FDA ultimately may decide that the application does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval.

After the FDA evaluates an NDA, it will issue an approval letter or a Complete Response Letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the drug with prescribing information for specific indications. A Complete Response Letter indicates that the review cycle of the application is complete and the application will not be approved in its present form. A Complete Response Letter usually describes the specific deficiencies in the NDA identified by the FDA and may require additional clinical data, such as an additional pivotal Phase 3 trial or other significant and time-consuming requirements related to clinical trials, nonclinical studies or manufacturing. If a Complete Response Letter is issued, the sponsor must resubmit the NDA or, addressing all of the deficiencies identified in the letter, or withdraw the application. Even if such data and information are submitted, the FDA may decide that the NDA does not satisfy the criteria for approval.

If a product receives regulatory approval, the approval may be significantly limited to specific diseases and dosages or the indications for use may otherwise be limited, which could restrict the commercial value of the product. In addition, the FDA may require a sponsor to conduct Phase 4 testing, which involves clinical trials designed to further assess a drug’s safety and effectiveness after NDA approval, and may require testing and surveillance programs to monitor the safety of approved products which have been commercialized. The FDA may also place other conditions on approval including the requirement for a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy, or REMS, to assure the safe use of the drug. If the FDA concludes a REMS is needed, the sponsor of the NDA must submit a proposed REMS. The FDA will not approve the NDA without an approved REMS, if required. A REMS could include medication guides, physician communication plans or elements to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. Any of these limitations on approval or marketing could restrict the commercial promotion, distribution, prescription or dispensing of products. Marketing approval may be withdrawn for non-compliance with regulatory requirements or if problems occur following initial marketing.

In addition, the Pediatric Research Equity Act, or PREA, requires a sponsor to conduct pediatric clinical trials for most drugs, for a new active ingredient, new indication, new dosage form, new dosing regimen or new route of administration. Under PREA, original NDAs and supplements must contain a pediatric assessment unless the sponsor has received a deferral or waiver. The required assessment must evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the product for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe and effective. The sponsor or FDA may request a deferral of pediatric clinical trials for some or all of the pediatric subpopulations. A deferral may be granted for several reasons, including a finding that the drug is ready for approval for use in adults before pediatric clinical trials are complete or that additional safety or effectiveness data needs to be collected before the pediatric clinical trials begin. The FDA must send a non-compliance letter to any sponsor that fails to submit the required assessment, keep a deferral current or fails to submit a request for approval of a pediatric formulation.

Expedited Development and Review Programs

A sponsor may seek approval of its product candidate under programs designed to expedite FDA’s review and approval of new drugs and biological products that meet certain criteria. The FDA has a fast track designation program that is intended to expedite or facilitate the process for reviewing new drug products that meet certain criteria. Specifically, new drugs are eligible for Fast Track designation if they are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for the disease or condition. With regard to a fast track product, the FDA may consider for review sections of the NDA on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted, if the sponsor

37

provides a schedule for the submission of the sections of the NDA, the FDA agrees to accept sections of the NDA and determines that the schedule is acceptable, and the sponsor pays any required user fees upon submission of the first section of the NDA.

Any product submitted to the FDA for approval, including a product with a fast track designation, may also be eligible for other types of FDA programs intended to expedite development and review, such as priority review and accelerated approval. A product is eligible for priority review if it treats a serious condition and, if approved, would provide a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness. The FDA will attempt to direct additional resources to the evaluation of an application for a new drug designated for priority review in an effort to facilitate the review. The FDA endeavors to review applications with priority review designations within six months of the filing date as compared to ten months for review of new molecular entity NDAs under its current PDUFA review goals.

In addition, a product may be eligible for accelerated approval. Drug products intended to treat serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions may be eligible for accelerated approval upon a determination that the product has an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality, that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit, taking into account the severity, rarity, or prevalence of the condition and the availability or lack of alternative treatments. As a condition of approval, the FDA may require that a sponsor of a drug receiving accelerated approval perform adequate and well-controlled post-marketing clinical trials. In addition, the FDA currently requires as a condition for accelerated approval pre-approval of promotional materials, which could adversely impact the timing of the commercial launch of the product. FDA may withdraw approval of a drug or indication approved under accelerated approval on an expedited basis if, for example, the sponsor fails to conduct the required confirmatory trial or if such confirmatory trial fails to verify the predicted clinical benefit of the product.

The Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act established a category of drugs referred to as “breakthrough therapies” that may be eligible to receive breakthrough therapy designation. A sponsor may seek FDA designation of a product candidate as a “breakthrough therapy” if the product is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other products, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the product may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. If the FDA designates a product as breakthrough therapy, it may take actions appropriate to expedite the development and review of the application, which may include holding meetings with the sponsor and the review team throughout the development of the therapy; providing timely advice to, and interactive communication with, the sponsor regarding the development of the drug to ensure that the development program to gather the nonclinical and clinical data necessary for approval is as efficient as practicable; involving senior managers and experienced review staff, as appropriate, in a collaborative, cross-disciplinary review; assigning a cross-disciplinary project lead for the FDA review team to facilitate an efficient review of the development program and to serve as a scientific liaison between the review team and the sponsor; and considering alternative clinical trial designs when scientifically appropriate, which may result in smaller trials or more efficient trials that require less time to complete and may minimize the number of patients exposed to a potentially less efficacious treatment. The breakthrough therapy designation also includes all of the fast track program features, which means that the sponsor may file sections of the NDA for review on a rolling basis if certain conditions are satisfied, including an agreement with FDA on the proposed schedule for submission of portions of the application and the payment of applicable user fees before the FDA may initiate a review. The breakthrough therapy designation is a distinct status from both accelerated approval and priority review, which can also be granted to the same drug if relevant criteria are met.

Fast track designation, priority review and breakthrough therapy designation do not change the standards for approval but may expedite the development or approval process. Even if a product qualifies for one or more of these programs, the FDA may later decide that the product no longer meets the conditions for qualification or decide that the time period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened. We may explore some of these opportunities for our product candidates as appropriate.

38

Post-Approval Requirements

Any products manufactured or distributed pursuant to FDA approvals are subject to pervasive and continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, requirements relating to record-keeping, reporting of adverse experiences, periodic reporting, product sampling and distribution, and advertising and promotion of the product. After approval, most changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications or other labeling claims, are subject to prior FDA review and approval. There also are continuing, annual program fees for any marketed products. Drug manufacturers and their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies, and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with cGMP, which impose certain procedural and documentation requirements upon us and our third-party manufacturers. Changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated, and, depending on the significance of the change, may require prior FDA approval before being implemented. FDA regulations also require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMP and impose reporting requirements upon us and any third-party manufacturers that we may decide to use. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain compliance with cGMP and other aspects of regulatory compliance.

The FDA may withdraw approval if compliance with regulatory requirements and standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the market. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in revisions to the approved labeling to add new safety information, imposition of post-market studies or clinical studies to assess new safety risks, or imposition of distribution restrictions or other restrictions under a REMS program. Other potential consequences include, among other things:

In addition, the FDA closely regulates the marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of drug products. A company can make only those claims relating to safety and efficacy, purity and potency that are approved by the FDA and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses. Failure to comply with these requirements can result in, among other things, adverse publicity, warning letters, corrective advertising and potential civil and criminal penalties. Physicians may prescribe legally available products for uses that are not described in the product’s labeling and that differ from those tested by the manufacturer and approved by the FDA. Such off-label uses are common across medical specialties. Physicians may believe that such off-label uses are the best treatment for many patients in varied circumstances. The FDA does not regulate the behavior of physicians in their choice of treatments. The FDA does, however, restrict manufacturer’s communications on the subject of off-label use of their products.

39

Orphan Drug Designation and Exclusivity

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

If a product that has orphan designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease or condition for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan product exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications to market the same drug for the same indication for seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan exclusivity or inability to manufacture the product in sufficient quantities. The designation of such drug also entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax advantages and user-fee waivers. However, competitors may receive approval of different products for the indication for which the orphan product has exclusivity or obtain approval for the same product but for a different indication for which the orphan product has exclusivity. Orphan exclusivity also could block the approval of one of our product candidates for seven years if a competitor obtains approval of the same drug as defined by the FDA or if our product candidate is determined to be contained within the competitor’s product for the same indication or disease. In addition, if an orphan designated product receives marketing approval for an indication broader than what is designated, it may not be entitled to orphan exclusivity.

Marketing Exclusivity

Market exclusivity provisions under the FDCA can delay the submission or the approval of certain marketing applications. The FDCA provides a five-year period of non-patent marketing exclusivity within the United States to the first applicant to obtain approval of an NDA for a new chemical entity. A drug is a new chemical entity if the FDA has not previously approved any other new drug containing the same active moiety, which is the molecule or ion responsible for the action of the drug substance. During the exclusivity period, the FDA may not approve or even accept for review an abbreviated new drug application, or ANDA, or an NDA submitted under Section 505(b)(2), or 505(b)(2) NDA, submitted by another company for another drug based on the same active moiety, regardless of whether the drug is intended for the same indication as the original innovative drug or for another indication, where the applicant does not own or have a legal right of reference to all the data required for approval. However, an application may be submitted after four years if it contains a certification of patent invalidity or non-infringement to one of the patents listed with the FDA by the innovator NDA holder.

The FDCA alternatively provides three years of marketing exclusivity for an NDA, or supplement to an existing NDA if new clinical investigations, other than bioavailability studies, that were conducted or sponsored by the applicant are deemed by the FDA to be essential to the approval of the application, for example new indications, dosages or strengths of an existing drug. This three-year exclusivity covers only the modification for which the drug received approval on the basis of the new clinical investigations and does not prohibit the FDA from approving ANDAs or 505(b)(2) NDAs for drugs containing the active agent for the original indication or condition of use. Five-year and three-year exclusivity will not delay the submission or approval of a full NDA. However, an applicant submitting a full NDA would be required to conduct or obtain a right of reference to all of the preclinical studies and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials necessary to demonstrate safety and effectiveness.

Pediatric exclusivity is another type of marketing exclusivity available in the United States. Pediatric exclusivity provides for an additional six months of marketing exclusivity attached to another period of exclusivity if a sponsor conducts clinical trials in children in response to a written request from the FDA. The issuance of a written request does not require the sponsor to undertake the described clinical trials. In

40

addition, orphan drug exclusivity, as described above, may offer a seven-year period of marketing exclusivity, except in certain circumstances.

U.S. Healthcare Fraud and Abuse Laws and Compliance Requirements

In addition to FDA regulation of pharmaceutical products, U.S. federal and state healthcare laws and regulations restrict business practices in the pharmaceutical industry. These laws may impact, among other things, our current and future business operations, including our clinical research activities, and constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships with healthcare providers and other parties. These laws include anti-kickback and false claims laws, civil monetary penalties laws, and physician and other healthcare provider payment transparency laws. In addition to the federal laws summarized below, we may also be subject to similar state and local laws and regulations that may apply to business practices, including but not limited to, research, distribution, sales and marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by non-governmental third-party payors, including private insurers, or by patients themselves.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting or receiving remuneration, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind to induce or in return for purchasing, leasing, ordering or arranging for or recommending the purchase, lease or order of any item or service reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid or other federal healthcare programs. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of this statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation.

The federal civil and criminal false claims laws, including the civil False Claims Act, and civil monetary penalties laws prohibit, among other things, any individual or entity from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false claim for payment to the federal government, knowingly making, using or causing to be made or used a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim to the federal government, or from knowingly making a false statement to avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the civil False Claims Act.

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

The federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, with specific exceptions, to report annually to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, information related to payments or other transfers of value made during the previous year to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), certain other health care providers beginning in 2022, and teaching hospitals, and applicable manufacturers and applicable group purchasing organizations to report annually to CMS ownership and investment interests held during the previous year by such physicians as defined under statute and their immediate family members.

Similar state and local laws and regulations may also restrict business practices in the pharmaceutical industry, such as state anti-kickback and false claims laws, which may apply to business practices, including but not limited to, research, distribution, sales and marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by non-governmental third-party payors, including private insurers, or by patients themselves; state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical

41

industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government, or otherwise restrict payments that may be made to healthcare providers and other potential referral sources; state laws and regulations that require drug manufacturers to file reports relating to pricing and marketing information or which require tracking gifts and other remuneration and items of value provided to physicians, other healthcare providers and entities; and state and local laws that require the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives.

Violation of any of such laws or any other governmental regulations that apply may result in significant criminal, civil and administrative penalties including damages, fines, imprisonment, disgorgement, additional reporting requirements and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, disgorgement, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations.

U.S. Coverage and Reimbursement

Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of any product candidate for which we may seek regulatory approval. Sales in the United States will depend, in part, on the availability of sufficient coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors, which include government health programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, TRICARE and the Veterans Administration, as well as managed care organizations and private health insurers. Prices at which we or our customers seek reimbursement for our product candidates can be subject to challenge, reduction or denial by third-party payors. For products administered under the supervision of a physician, obtaining coverage and adequate reimbursement may be particularly difficult because of the higher prices often associated with such drugs.

The process for determining whether a third-party payor will provide coverage for a product is typically separate from the process for setting the reimbursement rate that the payor will pay for the product. In the United States, there is no uniform policy among payors for coverage or reimbursement. Decisions regarding whether to cover any of a product, the extent of coverage and amount of reimbursement to be provided are made on a plan-by-plan basis. Third-party payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own coverage and reimbursement policies, but also have their own methods and approval processes. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for products can differ significantly from payor to payor. As a result, the coverage determination process is often a time-consuming and costly process that can require manufacturers to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of a product to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be applied consistently or obtained in the first instance.

Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the price and examining the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of medical products and services, in addition to their safety and efficacy. Adoption of price controls and cost-containment measures, and adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures, could further limit sales of any product that receives approval. Third-party payors may not consider our product candidates to be medically necessary or cost-effective compared to other available therapies, or the rebate percentages required to secure favorable coverage may not yield an adequate margin over cost or may not enable us to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on our investment in drug development. Additionally, decreases in third-party reimbursement for any product or a decision by a third-party payor not to cover a product could reduce physician usage and patient demand for the product.

U.S. Healthcare Reform

In the United States, there has been, and continues to be, several legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system that could prevent or delay marketing approval of product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities, and affect the profitable sale of product candidates.

Among policy makers and payors in the United States, there is significant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare costs, improving quality

42

and/or expanding access. In the United States, the pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives. In March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or collectively, the ACA, was passed, which substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers, and significantly affected the pharmaceutical industry. The ACA increased the minimum level of Medicaid rebates payable by manufacturers of brand name drugs from 15.1% to 23.1%; required collection of rebates for drugs paid by Medicaid managed care organizations; required manufacturers to participate in a coverage gap discount program, in which manufacturers must agree to offer point-of-sale discounts off negotiated prices of applicable brand drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period, as a condition for the manufacturer’s outpatient drugs to be covered under Medicare Part D; imposed a non-deductible annual fee on pharmaceutical manufacturers or importers who sell certain “branded prescription drugs” to specified federal government programs, implemented a new methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated for drugs that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted, or injected; expanded eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs; creates a new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in, and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research; and established a Center for Medicare Innovation at the CMS to test innovative payment and service delivery models to lower Medicare and Medicaid spending, potentially including prescription drug spending.

There remain judicial and political challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. For example, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, or the Tax Act, includes a provision repealing, effective January 1, 2019, the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the ACA on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year that is commonly referred to as the “individual mandate.” On December 14, 2018, a U.S. District Court Judge in the Northern District of Texas, or the Texas District Court Judge, ruled that the individual mandate is a critical and inseverable feature of the ACA, and therefore, because it was repealed as part of the Tax Act, the remaining provisions of the ACA are invalid as well. On December 18, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit affirmed the District Court’s decision that the individual mandate was unconstitutional but remanded the case back to the District Court to determine whether the remaining provisions of the ACA are invalid as well. The U.S. Supreme Court is currently reviewing the case, although it is unclear how the Supreme Court will rule. It is also unclear how such other efforts, if any, to challenge, repeal or replace the ACA will impact the ACA.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. These changes included aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect on April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect through 2030, with the exception of a temporary suspension from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. On January 2, 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years.

Moreover, there has recently been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for pharmaceutical products. The likelihood of success for these and other proposals to control drug costs is uncertain, particularly in light of the new Biden administration. Individual states in the United States have also become increasingly active in implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine which drugs and suppliers will be included in their healthcare programs Furthermore, there has been increased interest by third party payors and governmental authorities in reference pricing systems and publication of discounts and list prices.

43

Foreign Regulation

In order to market any product outside of the United States, we would need to comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries and jurisdictions regarding quality, safety and efficacy and governing, among other things, clinical trials, marketing authorization, commercial sales and distribution of our products. Whether or not we obtain FDA approval for a product, we would need to obtain the necessary approvals by the comparable foreign regulatory authorities before we can commence clinical trials or marketing of the product in foreign countries and jurisdictions. Although many of the issues discussed above with respect to the United States apply similarly in the context of the European Union, or EU, the approval process varies between countries and jurisdictions and can involve additional product testing and additional administrative review periods. The time required to obtain approval in other countries and jurisdictions might differ from and be longer than that required to obtain FDA approval. Regulatory approval in one country or jurisdiction does not ensure regulatory approval in another, but a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one country or jurisdiction may negatively impact the regulatory process in others.

To market a medicinal product in the European Economic Area, or EEA (which is comprised of the 28 Member States of the EU plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein), we must obtain a Marketing Authorization, or MA. There are two types of marketing authorizations:

Under the above described procedures, before granting the MA, the EMA or the competent authorities of the Member States of the EEA make an assessment of the risk-benefit balance of the product on the basis of scientific criteria concerning its quality, safety and efficacy.

Data and marketing exclusivity

In the EEA, new products authorized for marketing, or reference products, qualify for eight years of data exclusivity and an additional two years of market exclusivity upon marketing authorization. The data exclusivity period prevents generic or biosimilar applicants from relying on the pre-clinical and clinical trial data contained in the dossier of the reference product when applying for a generic or biosimilar marketing authorization in the EU during a period of eight years from the date on which the reference product was first authorized in the EU. The market exclusivity period prevents a successful generic or biosimilar applicant from commercializing its product in the EU until 10 years have elapsed from the initial authorization of the reference product in the EU. The 10-year market exclusivity period can be extended to a maximum of eleven years if, during the first eight years of those 10 years, the marketing authorization holder obtains an authorization for one or more new therapeutic indications which, during the scientific evaluation prior to their authorization, are held to bring a significant clinical benefit in comparison with existing therapies.

44

Pediatric investigation plan

In the EEA, marketing authorization applications for new medicinal products not authorized have to include the results of studies conducted in the pediatric population, in compliance with a pediatric investigation plan, or PIP, agreed with the EMA’s Pediatric Committee, or PDCO. The PIP sets out the timing and measures proposed to generate data to support a pediatric indication of the drug for which marketing authorization is being sought. The PDCO can grant a deferral of the obligation to implement some or all of the measures of the PIP until there are sufficient data to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of the product in adults. Further, the obligation to provide pediatric clinical trial data can be waived by the PDCO when these data is not needed or appropriate because the product is likely to be ineffective or unsafe in children, the disease or condition for which the product is intended occurs only in adult populations, or when the product does not represent a significant therapeutic benefit over existing treatments for pediatric patients. Once the marketing authorization is obtained in all Member States of the EU and study results are included in the product information, even when negative, the product is eligible for six months’ supplementary protection certificate extension.

Clinical trials

Clinical trials of medicinal products in the European Union must be conducted in accordance with European Union and national regulations and the International Conference on Harmonization, or ICH, guidelines on GCPs. Additional GCP guidelines from the European Commission, focusing in particular on traceability, apply to clinical trials of advanced therapy medicinal products. If the sponsor of the clinical trial is not established within the European Union, it must appoint an entity within the European Union to act as its legal representative. The sponsor must take out a clinical trial insurance policy, and in most EU countries, the sponsor is liable to provide ‘no fault’ compensation to any study subject injured in the clinical trial.

Prior to commencing a clinical trial, the sponsor must obtain a clinical trial authorization from the competent authority, and a positive opinion from an independent ethics committee. The application for a clinical trial authorization must include, among other things, a copy of the trial protocol and an investigational medicinal product dossier containing information about the manufacture and quality of the medicinal product under investigation. Currently, clinical trial authorization applications must be submitted to the competent authority in each EU Member State in which the trial will be conducted. Under the new Regulation on Clinical Trials, which is currently expected to take effect in 2019, there will be a centralized application procedure where one national authority takes the lead in reviewing the application and the other national authorities have only a limited involvement. Any substantial changes to the trial protocol or other information submitted with the clinical trial applications must be notified to or approved by the relevant competent authorities and ethics committees. Medicines used in clinical trials must be manufactured in accordance with cGMP. Other national and European Union-wide regulatory requirements also apply.

Data Privacy and Security Laws

We are subject to laws and regulations governing data privacy and the protection of health-related and other personal information. In the United States, numerous federal and state laws and regulations, including data breach notification laws, health information privacy and security laws, including HIPAA, and federal and state consumer protection laws and regulations (e.g., Section 5 of the FTC Act), that govern the collection, use, disclosure, and protection of health-related and other personal information could apply to our operations or the operations of our partners. In addition, certain state and non-U.S. laws, such as the California Consumer Privacy Act, or the CCPA, the California Privacy Rights Act, or the CPRA, and the General Data Protection Regulation, or the GDPR, govern the privacy and security of personal information, including health-related information in certain circumstances, some of which are more stringent than HIPAA and many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts. Failure to comply with these laws, where applicable, can result in the imposition of significant civil and/or criminal penalties and private litigation.  Privacy and security laws, regulations, and other obligations are constantly evolving, may conflict with each other to complicate compliance efforts, and can result in investigations, proceedings, or actions that lead to significant civil and/or criminal penalties and restrictions on data processing.

45

Human Capital

As of February 26, 2021, we had 82 full-time employees, 30 of whom have a Ph.D. or M.D. None of our employees are represented by labor unions or covered by collective bargaining agreements. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good.

Our human capital resources objectives include, as applicable, identifying, recruiting, retaining, and incentivizing our management team and our clinical, scientific and other employees and consultants. The principal purposes of our equity and cash incentive plans are to attract, retain and motivate personnel through the granting of stock-based and cash-based compensation awards, in order to align our interests and the interests of our stockholders with those of our employees and consultants.

Corporate Information  

We were originally founded as a Delaware limited liability company on November 13, 2012, under the name Avidity NanoMedicines LLC. On June 4, 2016, we changed our name to Avidity Biosciences LLC, and on April 1, 2019, we converted into a Delaware corporation under the name Avidity Biosciences, Inc. Our principal executive offices are located at 10975 N. Torrey Pines Road, Suite 150, La Jolla, California 92037, and our telephone number is (858) 401-7900.

Available Information

Our internet address is www.aviditybiosciences.com. Our investor relations website is located at https://aviditybiosciences.investorroom.com/home. We make available free of charge on our investor relations website under “SEC Filings” our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, our directors’ and officers’ Section 16 reports and any amendments to those reports as soon as reasonably practicable after filing or furnishing such materials to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC. They are also available for free on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. The information in or accessible through the SEC and our website are not incorporated into, and are not considered part of, this filing.

ITEM 1A.    Risk Factors

You should carefully consider the following risk factors, together with the other information contained in this annual report on Form 10-K, including our financial statements and the related notes and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” before making a decision to purchase or sell shares of our common stock. We cannot assure you that any of the events discussed in the risk factors below will not occur. These risks could have a material and adverse impact on our business, results of operations, financial condition and growth prospects. If that were to happen, the trading price of our common stock could decline. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial also may impair our business operations or financial condition.

Summary of Risk Factors

The principal risks and uncertainties affecting our business include the following:

46

Risks Related to Our Limited Operating History, Financial Position and Capital Requirements

We have a limited operating history, have incurred significant operating losses since our inception and expect to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future. We may never generate any revenue or become profitable or, if we achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain it.

Biopharmaceutical product development is a highly speculative undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. We are a preclinical-stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history upon which you can evaluate our business and prospects. All of our development programs, including our lead product candidate, AOC 1001, are in preclinical development or in the drug discovery stage. We commenced operations in 2012, and to date, we have focused primarily on organizing and staffing our company, business planning, raising capital, developing our proprietary AOC technology platform, identifying product candidates, establishing our intellectual property portfolio and conducting research and preclinical studies. Our approach to the discovery and development of product candidates based on our AOC platform is unproven, and we do not know whether we will be able to develop any product candidates that succeed in clinical development or products of commercial value. As an organization, we have not yet completed any clinical trials, obtained regulatory approvals, manufactured a commercial-scale product, or arranged for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conducted sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Consequently, any predictions made about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a history of successfully developing and commercializing biopharmaceutical products.

We have incurred significant operating losses since our inception. We do not have any products approved for sale and have not generated any product revenue since our inception. If our product

47

candidates are not successfully developed and approved, we may never generate any significant revenue. Our net losses were $44.4 million and $24.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively. As of December 31, 2020, we had an accumulated deficit of $66.5 million. Substantially all of our losses have resulted from expenses incurred in connection with our research and development programs and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations. All of our product candidates will require substantial additional development time and resources before we would be able to apply for or receive regulatory approvals and begin generating revenue from product sales. We expect to continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future, and we anticipate these losses will increase substantially as we continue our development of, seek regulatory approval for and potentially commercialize any of our product candidates.

To become and remain profitable, we must succeed in developing and eventually commercializing products that generate significant revenue. This will require us to be successful in a range of challenging activities, including completing preclinical studies and clinical trials of our product candidates, identifying lead product candidates, discovering additional product candidates, obtaining regulatory approval for these product candidates and manufacturing, marketing and selling any products for which we may obtain regulatory approval. We are only in the preliminary stages of most of these activities. We may never succeed in these activities and, even if we do, may never generate revenues that are significant enough to achieve profitability. In addition, we have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfully overcome many of the risks and uncertainties frequently encountered by companies in new and rapidly evolving fields, particularly in the biopharmaceutical industry. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with biopharmaceutical product development, we are unable to accurately predict the timing or amount of increased expenses or when, or if, we will be able to achieve profitability. Even if we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our failure to become and remain profitable may have an adverse effect on the value of our company and could impair our ability to raise capital, expand our business, maintain our research and development efforts, diversify our product candidates or even continue our operations. A decline in the value of our company could also cause you to lose all or part of your investment.

We will require substantial additional financing to achieve our goals, and a failure to obtain this necessary capital when needed on acceptable terms, or at all, could force us to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our development programs, commercialization efforts or other operations.

The development of biopharmaceutical product candidates is capital-intensive. We expect our expenses to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we conduct our ongoing and planned preclinical studies of our development programs, initiate clinical trials for our product candidates and seek regulatory approval for our current product candidates and any future product candidates we may develop. If we obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, we also expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to product manufacturing, marketing, sales and distribution. Because the outcome of any preclinical study or clinical trial is highly uncertain, we cannot reasonably estimate the actual amounts necessary to successfully complete the development and commercialization of our product candidates. Furthermore, we expect to incur additional costs associated with operating as a public company. Accordingly, we will need to obtain substantial additional funding in connection with our continuing operations. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on attractive terms, we could be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our research and development programs or any future commercialization efforts.

We believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities will enable us to fund our operations for at least the next 12 months. In particular, we expect that these funds will allow us to advance the development of AOC 1001 for myotonic dystrophy type 1, or DM1, through the completion of our planned Phase 1/2 clinical trial, advance our AOC for facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy, or FSHD, into clinical development and advance our lead AOC for Duchenne muscular dystrophy, or DMD, into clinical development. We have based these estimates on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could use our capital resources sooner than we currently expect. Our operating plans and other demands on our cash resources may change as a result of many factors currently unknown to us, and we may need to seek additional funds sooner than planned, through public or private equity or debt financings

48

or other capital sources, including potentially additional collaborations, licenses and other similar arrangements. In addition, we may seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans. Attempting to secure additional financing may divert our management from our day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop our product candidates.

Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including, but not limited to:

Identifying potential product candidates and conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials is a time consuming, expensive and uncertain process that takes years to complete, and we may never generate the necessary data or results required to obtain regulatory approval and commercialize our product candidates. In addition, our product candidates, if approved, may not achieve commercial success. Our commercial revenues, if any, will be derived from sales of products that we do not expect to be commercially available for many years, if at all. Accordingly, we will need to continue to rely on additional financing to achieve our business objectives. Adequate additional financing may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all.

Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our stockholders, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish rights to our technologies or product candidates.

Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial product revenues, we expect to finance our cash needs through equity offerings, debt financings, or other capital sources, including potential additional collaborations, licenses and other similar arrangements. We do not have any committed external source of funds. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, your ownership interest will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other

49

preferences that adversely affect your rights as a common stockholder. Any future debt financing and preferred equity financing, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, selling or licensing our assets, making capital expenditures, declaring dividends or encumbering our assets to secure future indebtedness. Such restrictions could adversely impact our ability to conduct our operations and execute our business plan.

If we raise additional funds through future collaborations, licenses and other similar arrangements, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our future revenue streams, research programs, product candidates or AOC platform, or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us and/or that may reduce the value of our common stock. If we are unable to raise additional funds through equity or debt financings or other arrangements when needed or on terms acceptable to us, we would be required to delay, limit, reduce, or terminate our product development or future commercialization efforts or grant rights to develop and market product candidates that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves.

Risks Related to the Discovery, Development and Regulatory Approval of Our Product Candidates

We are early in our development efforts and all of our development programs are in the preclinical or discovery stage. If we are unable to successfully develop, obtain regulatory approval and ultimately commercialize product candidates, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.

We are in the early stages of our development efforts and all of our development programs, including AOC 1001, are in the preclinical or drug discovery stage. We have invested substantially all of our efforts in developing our AOC platform, identifying potential product candidates and conducting preclinical studies. We will need to progress AOC 1001 and our other product candidates through IND-enabling studies and receive authorization from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or the FDA, or the equivalent regulatory authority in other countries, to proceed under an IND, or its equivalent, prior to initiating their clinical development. Our ability to generate product revenues, which we do not expect will occur for many years, if ever, will depend heavily on the successful development and eventual commercialization of our product candidates. The success of our product candidates will depend on several factors, including the following:

50

If we are unable to develop, obtain regulatory approval for, or, if approved, successfully commercialize our product candidates, we may not be able to generate sufficient revenue to continue our business.

Our approach to the discovery and development of product candidates based on our AOC platform is unproven, and we do not know whether we will be able to develop any products of commercial value, or if competing technological approaches will limit the commercial value of our product candidates or render our AOC platform obsolete.

The success of our business depends primarily upon our ability to identify, develop and commercialize products based on our proprietary AOC platform, which leverages a novel and unproven approach. While we have had favorable preclinical study results based on our technology platform, we have not yet succeeded and may not succeed in demonstrating efficacy and safety for any product candidates in clinical trials or in obtaining marketing approval thereafter. Our lead product candidate, AOC 1001, is in late preclinical development and we have not yet completed any clinical trials for any product candidate. Our research methodology and novel approach to oligonucleotide based therapy may be unsuccessful in identifying additional product candidates, and any product candidates based on our technology platform may be shown to have harmful side effects or may have other characteristics that may necessitate additional clinical testing, or make the product candidates unmarketable or unlikely to receive marketing approval. We may also be unsuccessful in developing and demonstrating utility of our AOCs in cell types beyond the muscle, including under our Lilly Agreement for immunology and other select indications and under our research collaboration with MyoKardia for cardiac tissue. Further, because all of our product candidates and development programs are based on our AOC platform, adverse developments with respect to one of our programs may have a significant adverse impact on the actual or perceived likelihood of success and value of our other programs.

In addition, the biotechnology and biopharmaceutical industries are characterized by rapidly advancing technologies. Our future success will depend in part on our ability to maintain a competitive position with our AOC approach. If we fail to stay at the forefront of technological change in utilizing our AOC platform to create and develop product candidates, we may be unable to compete effectively. Our competitors may render our AOC approach obsolete, or limit the commercial value of our product candidates, by advances in existing technological approaches or the development of new or different approaches (including, for example, using different mAbs or transporter protein combinations with oligonucleotides than us), potentially eliminating the advantages in our drug discovery process that we believe we derive from our research approach and proprietary technologies. By contrast, adverse developments with respect to other companies that attempt to use a similar approach to our approach may adversely impact the actual or perceived value of our AOC platform and potential of our product candidates.

If any of these events occur, we may be forced to abandon our development efforts for a program or programs, which would have a material adverse effect on our business and could potentially cause us to cease operations.

Preclinical and clinical development involves a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome, and the results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials are not necessarily predictive of future results. We have not tested any of our product candidates in clinical trials and our product candidates may not have favorable results in clinical trials, if any, or receive regulatory approval on a timely basis, if at all.

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

The results from preclinical studies or clinical trials of a product candidate may not predict the results of later clinical trials of the product candidate, and interim, topline, or preliminary results of a clinical trial

51

are not necessarily indicative of final results. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy characteristics despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. In particular, while we have conducted certain preclinical studies of AOC 1001 and other potential product candidates targeting rare muscle disorders, we do not know whether AOC 1001 or the other potential product candidates will perform in future clinical trials as they have performed in these prior studies. The positive results we have observed for our product candidates in preclinical animal models may not be predictive of our future clinical trials in humans. Furthermore, for some indications that are we are pursuing, including DM1, there are no animal models of the human disease and therefore the animal models may not be predictive for human disease outcomes. It is not uncommon to observe results in clinical trials that are unexpected based on preclinical studies and early clinical trials, and many product candidates fail in clinical trials despite very promising early results. We are currently in the process of advancing our AOC FSHD and the lead of our AOC DMD programs into IND-enabling studies. If unexpected observations or toxicities are observed in these studies, or in IND-enabling studies for any of our other development programs, this will delay clinical trials for such development programs. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data may be susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in clinical development even after achieving promising results in earlier studies. For the foregoing reasons, we cannot be certain that our ongoing and planned preclinical studies and planned clinical trials will be successful. Any safety concerns observed in any one of our clinical trials in our targeted indications could limit the prospects for regulatory approval of our product candidates in those and other indications, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Any difficulties or delays in the commencement or completion, or termination or suspension, of our planned clinical trials could result in increased costs to us, delay or limit our ability to generate revenue and adversely affect our commercial prospects.

Before we can initiate clinical trials for our product candidates, we must submit the results of preclinical studies to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities along with other information, including information about product candidate chemistry, manufacturing and controls and our proposed clinical trial protocol, as part of an IND application or similar regulatory filing required for authorization to proceed with clinical development. We are currently conducting IND-enabling studies for AOC 1001, and expect to submit an IND in 2021. Following regulatory approval, we expect to initiate a Phase 1/2 clinical trial of AOC 1001 in the second half of 2021. We will also need to complete IND-enabling studies and submit INDs for our other development programs prior to initiating clinical development. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to conduct additional preclinical studies for any product candidate before it allows us to initiate clinical trials under any IND or similar regulatory filing, which may lead to delays and increase the costs of our preclinical development programs. Any such delays in the commencement or completion of our planned clinical trials for AOC 1001 or any other product candidate could significantly affect our product development costs.

We do not know whether our planned trials will begin on time or be completed on schedule, if at all. The commencement and completion of clinical trials can be delayed for a number of reasons, including delays related to:

52

In addition, disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic may increase the likelihood that we encounter such difficulties or delays in initiating, enrolling, conducting or completing our planned clinical trials. We could also encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by the IRBs of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted, by a Data Safety Monitoring Board for such trial or by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Such authorities may impose such a suspension or termination due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a drug, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. In addition, changes in regulatory requirements and policies may occur, and we may need to amend clinical trial protocols to comply with these changes. Amendments may require us to resubmit our clinical trial protocols to IRBs for reexamination, which may impact the costs, timing or successful completion of a clinical trial.

Further, conducting clinical trials in foreign countries, as we may do for our product candidates, presents additional risks that may delay completion of our clinical trials. These risks include the failure of

53

enrolled patients in foreign countries to adhere to clinical protocol as a result of differences in healthcare services or cultural customs, managing additional administrative burdens associated with foreign regulatory schemes, as well as political and economic risks relevant to such foreign countries.

Moreover, principal investigators for our clinical trials may serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us from time to time and receive compensation in connection with such services. Under certain circumstances, we may be required to report some of these relationships to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority may conclude that a financial relationship between us and a principal investigator has created a conflict of interest or otherwise affected interpretation of the study. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority may therefore question the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site and the utility of the clinical trial itself may be jeopardized. This could result in a delay in approval, or rejection, of our marketing applications by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority, as the case may be, and may ultimately lead to the denial of marketing approval of one or more of our product candidates.

If we experience delays in the completion of, or termination of, any clinical trial of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of our product candidates will be harmed, and our ability to generate product revenues from any of these product candidates will be delayed. Moreover, any delays in completing our clinical trials will increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and approval process and jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenues.

In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, the termination or suspension of, or a delay in the commencement or completion of, clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of a product candidate. We may make formulation or manufacturing changes to our product candidates, in which case we may need to conduct additional preclinical studies to bridge our modified product candidates to earlier versions. Any delays to our clinical trials that occur as a result could shorten any period during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates and our competitors may be able to bring products to market before we do, and the commercial viability of our product candidates could be significantly reduced. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

We may find it difficult to enroll patients in our clinical trials. If we encounter difficulties enrolling subjects in our clinical trials, our clinical development activities could be delayed or otherwise adversely affected.

We may not be able to initiate or continue clinical trials for our product candidates if we are unable to identify and enroll a sufficient number of eligible patients to participate in these trials as required by the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside the United States. Subject enrollment, a significant factor in the timing of clinical trials, is affected by many factors including the size and nature of the patient population, the proximity of patients to clinical sites, the eligibility and exclusion criteria for the trial, the design of the clinical trial, the risk that enrolled patients will not complete a clinical trial, our ability to recruit clinical trial investigators with the appropriate competencies and experience, competing clinical trials and clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages and risks of the product candidate being studied in relation to other available therapies, including any new products that may be approved for the indications we are investigating as well as any product candidates under development. We will be required to identify and enroll a sufficient number of subjects for each of our clinical trials. Potential subjects for any planned clinical trials may not be adequately diagnosed or identified with the diseases which we are targeting or may not meet the entry criteria for such trials. We are initially developing product candidates targeting genetically defined, rare muscle disorders with limited patient pools from which to draw for clinical trials. Genetically defined diseases generally, including those for which our current product candidates are targeted, have low incidence and prevalence. We also may encounter difficulties in identifying and enrolling subjects with a stage of disease appropriate for our planned clinical trials and monitoring such subjects adequately during and after treatment. We may not be able to initiate or continue clinical trials if we are unable to locate a sufficient number of eligible subjects to participate in the clinical trials required by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. In addition, the process of finding and diagnosing subjects may prove costly.

54

The timing of our clinical trials depends, in part, on the speed at which we can recruit patients to participate in our trials, as well as completion of required follow-up periods. The eligibility criteria of our clinical trials, once established, will further limit the pool of available trial participants. If patients are unwilling to participate in our trials for any reason, including the existence of concurrent clinical trials for similar patient populations or the availability of approved therapies, or we otherwise have difficulty enrolling a sufficient number of patients, the timeline for recruiting subjects, conducting studies and obtaining regulatory approval of our product candidates may be delayed. Our inability to enroll a sufficient number of subjects for any of our future clinical trials would result in significant delays or may require us to abandon one or more clinical trials altogether. In addition, we expect to rely on CROs and clinical trial sites to ensure proper and timely conduct of our future clinical trials and, while we intend to enter into agreements governing their services, we will have limited influence over their actual performance.

We cannot assure you that our assumptions used in determining expected clinical trial timelines are correct or that we will not experience delays in enrollment, which would result in the delay of completion of such trials beyond our expected timelines.

Use of our product candidates could be associated with side effects, adverse events or other properties or safety risks, which could delay or preclude approval, cause us to suspend or discontinue clinical trials, abandon a product candidate, limit the commercial profile of an approved label or result in other significant negative consequences that could severely harm our business, prospects, operating results and financial condition.

We have not evaluated any product candidates in human clinical trials. Although other oligonucleotide therapeutics have received regulatory approval, our AOCs, which combine oligonucleotides with a mAb, are a novel approach to oligonucleotide therapies, which may present enhanced risk uncertainty associated with the safety profile of AOC 1001 and other AOC therapeutics compared to more well-established classes of therapies, or oligonucleotide or mAb-based therapies on their own. Moreover, there have been only a limited number of clinical trials involving the use of oligonucleotide therapeutics and none involving the proprietary technology used in our AOC platform. It is impossible to predict when or if any product candidates we may develop will prove safe in humans. As is the case with biopharmaceuticals generally, it is likely that there may be side effects and adverse events associated with our product candidates’ use. Results of our clinical trials could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of side effects or unexpected characteristics. Undesirable side effects caused by our product candidates could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. The drug-related side effects could affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the trial or result in potential product liability claims. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

Moreover, if our product candidates are associated with undesirable side effects in clinical trials or have characteristics that are unexpected, we may elect to abandon their development or limit their development to more narrow uses or subpopulations in which the undesirable side effects or other characteristics are less prevalent, less severe or more acceptable from a risk-benefit perspective, which may limit the commercial expectations for the product candidate if approved. We may also be required to modify our study plans based on findings after we commence our clinical trials. Many compounds that initially showed promise in early-stage testing have later been found to cause side effects that prevented further development of the compound. In addition, regulatory authorities may draw different conclusions or require additional testing to confirm these determinations.

It is possible that as we test our product candidates in larger, longer and more extensive clinical trials, or as the use of these product candidates becomes more widespread if they receive regulatory approval, illnesses, injuries, discomforts and other adverse events that were observed in earlier trials, as well as conditions that did not occur or went undetected in previous trials, may be reported by subjects. If such side effects become known later in development or upon approval, if any, such findings may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

55

Patients treated with our products, if approved, may experience previously unreported adverse reactions, and it is possible that the FDA or other regulatory authorities may ask for additional safety data as a condition of, or in connection with, our efforts to obtain approval of our product candidates. If safety problems occur or are identified after our products, if any, reach the market, we may make the decision or be required by regulatory authorities to amend the labeling of our products, recall our products or even withdraw approval for our products.

In addition, if one or more of our product candidates receives marketing approval, and we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by such product, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the particular product candidate, if approved, and could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.

As an organization, we have never conducted any clinical trials or submitted an application for regulatory approval and may be unable to do so for any of our product candidates.

We are early in our development efforts for our product candidates and we will need to successfully complete IND-enabling studies, Phase 1 clinical trials and later-stage and pivotal clinical trials, in order to obtain FDA or comparable foreign regulatory approval to market AOC 1001 or any other product candidates. Carrying out clinical trials and the submission of a successful NDA is a complicated process. As an organization, we plan to commence our first Phase 1/2 clinical in the second half of 2021, subject to receiving authorization to proceed under an IND. We have not previously conducted any clinical trials, have limited experience as a company in preparing, submitting and prosecuting regulatory filings and have not previously submitted an IND or an NDA or other comparable foreign regulatory submission for any product candidate. In addition, we have had limited interactions with the FDA and cannot be certain how many clinical trials of AOC 1001 or any other product candidates will be required or how such trials should be designed. Consequently, we may be unable to successfully and efficiently execute and complete necessary clinical trials in a way that leads to regulatory submission and approval of any of our product candidates. We may require more time and incur greater costs than our competitors and may not succeed in obtaining regulatory approvals of product candidates that we develop. Failure to commence or complete, or delays in, our planned clinical trials, could prevent us from or delay us in submitting NDAs for and commercializing our product candidates.

56

Our product candidates are subject to extensive regulation and compliance, which is costly and time consuming, and such regulation may cause unanticipated delays or prevent the receipt of the required approvals to commercialize our product candidates.

The clinical development, manufacturing, labeling, packaging, storage, record-keeping, advertising, promotion, import, export, marketing, distribution and adverse event reporting, including the submission of safety and other information, of our product candidates are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA in the United States and by comparable foreign regulatory authorities in foreign markets. In the United States, we are not permitted to market our product candidates until we receive regulatory approval from the FDA. The process of obtaining regulatory approval is expensive, often takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and can vary substantially based upon the type, complexity and novelty of the product candidates involved, as well as the target indications and patient population. Approval policies or regulations may change, and the FDA has substantial discretion in the drug approval process, including the ability to delay, limit or deny approval of a product candidate for many reasons. Despite the time and expense invested in clinical development of product candidates, regulatory approval is never guaranteed. Neither we nor any current or future collaborator is permitted to market any of our product candidates in the United States until we receive approval from the FDA.

Prior to obtaining approval to commercialize a product candidate in the United States or abroad, we or our collaborators must demonstrate with substantial evidence from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials, and to the satisfaction of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, that such product candidates are safe and effective for their intended uses. Results from preclinical studies and clinical trials can be interpreted in different ways. Even if we believe the preclinical or clinical data for our product candidates are promising, such data may not be sufficient to support approval by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, as the case may be, may also require us to conduct additional preclinical studies or clinical trials for our product candidates either prior to or post-approval, or may object to elements of our clinical development program.

The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities can delay, limit or deny approval of a product candidate for many reasons, including:

57

With respect to foreign markets, approval procedures vary among countries and, in addition to the foregoing risks, may involve additional product testing, administrative review periods and agreements with pricing authorities. In addition, events raising questions about the safety of certain marketed biopharmaceuticals may result in increased cautiousness by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities in reviewing new drugs based on safety, efficacy or other regulatory considerations and may result in significant delays in obtaining regulatory approvals. Any delay in obtaining, or inability to obtain, applicable regulatory approvals would prevent us or any of our potential future collaborators from commercializing our product candidates.

We may expend our limited resources to pursue a particular product candidate and fail to capitalize on product candidates or indications that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.

Because we have limited financial and managerial resources, we focus on specific product candidates and specific indications. As a result, we may forgo or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates that could have had greater commercial potential. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development programs and product candidates for specific indications may not yield any commercially viable product candidates. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through collaborations, licenses and other similar arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such product candidate.

We may not be able to obtain or maintain orphan drug designations for any of our product candidates, and we may be unable to maintain the benefits associated with orphan drug designation, including the potential for market exclusivity.

Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the United States and Europe, may designate drugs or biologics for relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs. Under the Orphan Drug Act of 1983, the FDA may designate a product as an orphan product if it is intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or a patient population of greater than 200,000 individuals in the United States, but for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in the United States. In the European Union, the European Medicines Agency’s, or EMA’s, Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products grants orphan drug designation to promote the development of products that are intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition affecting not more than five in 10,000 persons in the European Union. We have not received orphan drug designation in the United States for any product candidate. We may seek orphan drug designation in the United States and the European Union for AOC 1001 for patients with DM1, and we may seek orphan drug designation for certain of our other product candidates. There can be no assurance that the FDA or the EMA’s Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products will grant orphan designation for any indication for which we apply, or that we will be able to maintain such designation.

In the United States, orphan designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding toward clinical trial costs, tax advantages and user-fee waivers. In addition, if a product candidate that has orphan designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease for

58

which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including an NDA, to market the same product for the same indication for seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan drug exclusivity or where the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient product quantity. The applicable exclusivity period is ten years in Europe, but such exclusivity period can be reduced to six years if a product no longer meets the criteria for orphan designation or if the product is sufficiently profitable that market exclusivity is no longer justified.

Even if we obtain orphan drug exclusivity for a product, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product from competition because different drugs can be approved for the same condition. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority can subsequently approve the same drug for the same condition if such regulatory authority concludes that the later drug is clinically superior because it is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care. Orphan drug exclusivity may also be lost if the FDA later determines that the initial request for designation was materially defective. In addition, orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent the FDA from approving competing drugs for the same or similar indication containing a different active ingredient. In addition, if a subsequent drug is approved for marketing for the same or a similar indication as any of our product candidates that receive marketing approval, we may face increased competition and lose market share regardless of orphan drug exclusivity. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug nor gives the drug any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process.

We may seek Breakthrough Therapy designation or Fast Track designation by the FDA for one or more of our product candidates, but we may not receive such designation, and even if we do, such designation may not lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process and it does not increase the likelihood that our product candidates will receive marketing approval.

We may seek Breakthrough Therapy or Fast Track designation for some of our product candidates. If a product candidate is intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening condition and clinical or preclinical data demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for this condition, the sponsor may apply for Fast Track designation. The sponsor of a Fast Track product candidate has opportunities for more frequent interactions with the applicable FDA review team during product development and, once an NDA is submitted, the product candidate may be eligible for priority review. A Fast Track product candidate may also be eligible for rolling review, where the FDA may consider for review sections of the NDA on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted, if the sponsor provides a schedule for the submission of the sections of the NDA, the FDA agrees to accept sections of the NDA and determines that the schedule is acceptable, and the sponsor pays any required user fees upon submission of the first section of the NDA.  

A Breakthrough Therapy is defined as a drug or biologic that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs or biologics, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. For drugs or biologics that have been designated as Breakthrough Therapies, interaction and communication between the FDA and the sponsor of the trial can help to identify the most efficient path for clinical development while minimizing the number of patients placed in ineffective control regimens. The designation also includes the same benefits as Fast Track designation, including eligibility for rolling review of an NDA. Drugs or biologics designated as Breakthrough Therapies by the FDA and/or that receive Fast Track designation may also be eligible for priority review, which may be granted to NDAs or BLAs for drugs or biologics designed to treat serious or life-threatening conditions, and which if approved, would offer significant improvements in safety or effectiveness compared to marketed products.

Whether to grant Breakthrough Therapy or Fast Track designation is within the discretion of the FDA. Accordingly, even if we believe one of our product candidates meets the criteria for these designations, the FDA may disagree and instead determine not to make such designation. In any event, the receipt of either of these designations for a product candidate may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to product candidates considered for approval under conventional FDA review procedures and does not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, even if one or more of our

59

product candidates qualify for either of these designations, the FDA may later decide that the product candidate no longer meets the conditions for qualification.

We may conduct certain of our clinical trials for our product candidates outside of the United States. However, the FDA and other foreign equivalents may not accept data from such trials, in which case our development plans will be delayed, which could materially harm our business.

We may conduct one or more of our clinical trials for our product candidates outside the United States. Although the FDA may accept data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States, acceptance of this data is subject to certain conditions imposed by the FDA. Where data from foreign clinical trials are intended to serve as the basis for marketing approval in the United States, the FDA will not approve the application on the basis of foreign data alone unless those data are applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice; the studies were performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence; and the data are considered valid without the need for an on-site inspection by the FDA or, if the FDA considers such an inspection to be necessary, the FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. For studies that are conducted only at sites outside of the United States and not subject to an IND, the FDA requires the clinical trial to have been conducted in accordance with GCPs, and the FDA must be able to validate the data from the clinical trial through an on-site inspection if it deems such inspection necessary. For such studies not subject to an IND, the FDA generally does not provide advance comment on the clinical protocols for the studies, and therefore there is an additional potential risk that the FDA could determine that the study design or protocol for a non-U.S. clinical trial was inadequate, which could require us to conduct additional clinical trials. There can be no assurance the FDA will accept data from clinical trials conducted outside of the United States. If the FDA does not accept data from our clinical trials of our product candidates, it would likely result in the need for additional clinical trials, which would be costly and time consuming and delay or permanently halt our development of our product candidates.

Conducting clinical trials outside the United States also exposes us to additional risks, including risks associated with:

Interim, topline and preliminary data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials that we announce or publish from time to time may change as more patient data become available and are subject to audit and verification procedures that could result in material changes in the final data.

From time to time, we may publicly disclose interim, preliminary or topline data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials, which is based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following a more comprehensive review of the data related to the particular trial. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data. As a result, the interim, preliminary or topline results that we report may differ from future results of the same trials, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. Topline data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result, topline data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. From time to time, we may also disclose interim, preliminary or topline data from our clinical studies. Interim, topline or preliminary data from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data

60

become available. Adverse differences between preliminary, topline or interim data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects.

Further, others, including regulatory agencies, may not accept or agree with our assumptions, estimates, calculations, conclusions or analyses or may interpret or weigh the importance of data differently, which could impact the value of the particular program, the approvability or commercialization of the particular product candidate or product and the value of our company in general. In addition, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular study or clinical trial is based on what is typically extensive information, and you or others may not agree with what we determine is the material or otherwise appropriate information to include in our disclosure, and any information we determine not to disclose may ultimately be deemed significant with respect to future decisions, conclusions, views, activities or otherwise regarding a particular product, product candidate or our business. If the topline data that we report differ from actual results, or if others, including regulatory authorities, disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain approval for, and commercialize, our product candidates may be harmed, which could harm our business, operating results, prospects or financial condition.

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

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

Separately, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, on March 10, 2020 the FDA announced its intention to postpone most inspections of foreign manufacturing facilities and products, and, on March 18, 2020, the FDA temporarily postponed routine surveillance inspections of domestic manufacturing facilities. Subsequently, on July 10, 2020, the FDA announced its intention to resume certain on-site inspections of domestic manufacturing facilities subject to a risk-based prioritization system. The FDA intends to use this risk-based assessment system to identify the categories of regulatory activity that can occur within a given geographic area, ranging from mission critical inspections to resumption of all regulatory activities.  Regulatory authorities outside the United States may adopt similar restrictions or other policy measures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, or if global health concerns continue to prevent the FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA or other regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Risks Related to Our Reliance on Third Parties

We rely on third parties to conduct our preclinical studies and will rely on third parties to conduct our future clinical trials. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, comply with applicable regulatory requirements or meet expected deadlines, our development

61

programs and our ability to seek or obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize our product candidates may be delayed.

We are dependent on third parties to conduct our preclinical studies and expect to rely on such third parties for our future clinical trials, including our planned Phase 1/2 clinical trial of AOC 1001. Specifically, we have used and relied on, and intend to use and rely on, medical institutions, clinical investigators, CROs and consultants to conduct our preclinical studies and planned clinical trials in accordance with our clinical protocols and regulatory requirements. These CROs, investigators and other third parties play a significant role in the conduct and timing of these trials and subsequent collection and analysis of data. While we have and will have agreements governing the activities of our third-party contractors, we have limited influence over their actual performance. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol and legal, regulatory and scientific standards, and our reliance on our CROs and other third parties does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and our CROs are required to comply with GCP requirements, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for all of our product candidates in clinical development. Regulatory authorities enforce these GCPs through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, principal investigators and trial sites. If we or any of our CROs or trial sites fail to comply with applicable GCPs, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable, and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with products produced under cGMP regulations. Our failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process.

There is no guarantee that any of our CROs, investigators or other third parties will devote adequate time and resources to such trials or perform as contractually required. If any of these third parties fail to meet expected deadlines, adhere to our clinical protocols or meet regulatory requirements, or otherwise performs in a substandard manner, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated. In addition, many of the third parties with whom we contract may also have relationships with other commercial entities, including our competitors, for whom they may also be conducting clinical trials or other development activities that could harm our competitive position. In addition, principal investigators for our clinical trials are expected to serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us from time to time and may receive cash or equity compensation in connection with such services. If these relationships and any related compensation result in perceived or actual conflicts of interest, or the FDA concludes that the financial relationship may have affected the interpretation of the study, the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site may be questioned and the utility of the clinical trial itself may be jeopardized, which could result in the delay or rejection by the FDA of any NDA we submit. Any such delay or rejection could prevent us from commercializing our product candidates.

If any of our relationships with these third parties terminate, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative third parties on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Switching or adding additional CROs, investigators and other third parties involves additional cost and requires our management’s time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new CRO commences work. As a result, delays occur, which can materially impact our ability to meet our desired clinical development timelines. Though we carefully manage our relationships with our CROs, investigators and other third parties, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and prospects.

We rely on third parties for the manufacture of our product candidates for preclinical and clinical development. This reliance on third parties increases the risk that we will not have sufficient quantities of our product candidates or products or such quantities at an acceptable cost, which could delay, prevent or impair our development or commercialization efforts.

We do not own or operate manufacturing facilities and have no plans to develop our own clinical or commercial-scale manufacturing capabilities. We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacture of our product candidates and related raw materials for preclinical and clinical development, as well as for commercial manufacture if any of our product candidates receive marketing approval. The facilities used by third-party manufacturers to manufacture our product candidates must be approved by

62

the FDA and any comparable foreign regulatory authority pursuant to inspections that will be conducted after we submit an NDA to the FDA or any comparable filing to a foreign regulatory authority. We do not control the manufacturing process of, and are completely dependent on, third-party manufacturers for compliance with cGMP requirements for manufacture of products. If these third-party manufacturers cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the strict regulatory requirements of the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority, they will not be able to secure and/or maintain regulatory approval for their manufacturing facilities. Our AOCs, including AOC 1001, consist of a proprietary mAb conjugated with the oligonucleotide therapy. All of our mAbs are manufactured by starting with cells which are stored in a cell bank. We have multiple working cell banks and one master cell bank for our mAbs manufactured in accordance with cGMP and believe we would have adequate backup should any cell bank be lost in a catastrophic event. However, it is possible that we could lose multiple cell banks and have our manufacturing impacted by the need to replace the cell banks. In addition, we have no control over the ability of third-party manufacturers to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel. If the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority does not approve these facilities for the manufacture of our product candidates or if it withdraws any such approval in the future, we may need to find alternative manufacturing facilities, which would significantly impact our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for or market our product candidates, if approved. Our failure, or the failure of our third-party manufacturers, to comply with applicable regulations could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including clinical holds, fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, seizures or recalls of product candidates or products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly and adversely affect supplies of our products.

Our or a third party’s failure to execute on our manufacturing requirements on commercially reasonable terms and in compliance with cGMP could adversely affect our business in a number of ways, including:

In addition, we may be unable to establish any agreements with third-party manufacturers or to do so on acceptable terms. Even if we are able to establish agreements with third-party manufacturers, reliance on third-party manufacturers entails additional risks, including:

Our product candidates and any products that we may develop may compete with other product candidates and products for access to manufacturing facilities. There are a limited number of manufacturers that operate under cGMP regulations and that might be capable of manufacturing for us.

63

Any performance failure on the part of our existing or future manufacturers could delay clinical development or marketing approval, and any related remedial measures may be costly or time consuming to implement. We do not currently have arrangements in place for redundant supply or a second source for all required raw materials used in the manufacture of our product candidates. If our existing or future third-party manufacturers cannot perform as agreed, we may be required to replace such manufacturers and we may be unable to replace them on a timely basis or at all.

Our current and anticipated future dependence upon others for the manufacture of our product candidates or products may adversely affect our future profit margins and our ability to commercialize any products that receive marketing approval on a timely and competitive basis.

Our reliance on third parties requires us to share our trade secrets, which increases the possibility that a competitor will discover them or that our trade secrets will be misappropriated or disclosed.

Because we currently rely on third parties to manufacture our product candidates and to perform quality testing, we must, at times, share our proprietary technology and confidential information, including trade secrets, with them. We seek to protect our proprietary technology, in part, by entering into confidentiality agreements, and, if applicable, material transfer agreements, collaborative research agreements, consulting agreements or other similar agreements with our collaborators, advisors, employees and consultants prior to beginning research or disclosing proprietary information. These agreements typically limit the rights of the third parties to use or disclose our confidential information. Despite the contractual provisions employed when working with third parties, the need to share trade secrets and other confidential information increases the risk that such trade secrets become known by our competitors, are intentionally or inadvertently incorporated into the technology of others or are disclosed or used in violation of these agreements. Given that our proprietary position is based, in part, on our know-how and trade secrets and despite our efforts to protect our trade secrets, a competitor’s discovery of our proprietary technology and confidential information or other unauthorized use or disclosure would impair our competitive position and may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We are dependent on the Lilly Agreement for the discovery, development and commercialization of AOCs directed against certain targets in immunology and other select indications. Under certain circumstances, Lilly may unilaterally terminate the agreement for convenience, which could materially and adversely affect our business.

In April 2019, we entered into the Lilly Agreement for the discovery, development and commercialization of AOCs directed against certain targets in immunology and other select indications, or the Lilly AOCs. Under the Lilly Agreement, Lilly will be solely responsible for funding the cost of preclinical research and discovery activities, clinical development, regulatory approval and commercialization for the Lilly AOCs. Lilly primarily controls the research and development activities, pursuant to the terms of the Lilly Agreement, and our lack of control over such activities could result in delays or other difficulties in the development and commercialization of the Lilly AOCs. Any dispute with Lilly may result in the delay or termination of the research, development or commercialization of the Lilly AOCs, and may result in costly litigation that diverts our management’s attention and resources away from our day-to-day activities and which may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operation and prospects.

In addition, Lilly can terminate the Lilly Agreement (including for convenience), and in the event Lilly terminates the Lilly Agreement, we would be prevented from receiving any research and development funding, milestone payments, royalty payments and other benefits under the agreement.

In addition, any decision by Lilly to terminate the Lilly Agreement may negatively impact public perception of our AOC product candidates, which could adversely affect the market price of our common stock. We cannot provide any assurance with respect to the success of the collaboration with Lilly. Any of the foregoing events could have a materially adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

64

We may seek to enter into additional collaborations, licenses and other similar arrangements and may not be successful in doing so, and even if we are, we may relinquish valuable rights and may not realize the benefits of such relationships.

We may seek to enter into collaborations, joint ventures, licenses and other similar arrangements for the development or commercialization of our product candidates, due to capital costs required to develop or commercialize the product candidate or manufacturing constraints. We may not be successful in our efforts to establish such collaborations for our product candidates because our research and development pipeline may be insufficient, our product candidates may be deemed to be at too early of a stage of development for collaborative effort or third parties may not view our product candidates as having the requisite potential to demonstrate safety and efficacy or significant commercial opportunity. In addition, we face significant competition in seeking appropriate strategic partners, and the negotiation process can be time-consuming and complex. We may have to relinquish valuable rights to our future revenue streams, research programs, product candidates or AOC platform, or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us, as part of any such arrangement, and such arrangements may restrict us from entering into additional agreements with other potential collaborators. We cannot be certain that, following a collaboration, license or strategic transaction, we will achieve an economic benefit that justifies such transaction.

Even if we are successful in our efforts to establish such collaborations, the terms that we agree upon may not be favorable to us, and we may not be able to maintain such collaborations if, for example, the development or approval of a product candidate is delayed, the safety of a product candidate is questioned or the sales of an approved product candidate are unsatisfactory.

In addition, any potential future collaborations may be terminable by our strategic partners, and we may not be able to adequately protect our rights under these agreements. Furthermore, strategic partners may negotiate for certain rights to control decisions regarding the development and commercialization of our product candidates, if approved, and may not conduct those activities in the same manner as we do. Any termination of collaborations we enter into in the future, or any delay in entering into collaborations related to our product candidates, could delay the development and commercialization of our product candidates and reduce their competitiveness if they reach the market, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Risks Related to Commercialization of Our Product Candidates

Even if we receive regulatory approval for any product candidate, we will be subject to ongoing regulatory obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense. Additionally, our product candidates, if approved, could be subject to labeling and other restrictions on marketing or withdrawal from the market, and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or if we experience unanticipated problems with our product candidates, when and if any of them are approved.

Following potential approval of any our product candidates, the FDA may impose significant restrictions on a product’s indicated uses or marketing or impose ongoing requirements for potentially costly and time-consuming post-approval studies, post-market surveillance or clinical trials to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product. The FDA may also require a REMS as a condition of approval of our product candidates, which could include requirements for a medication guide, physician communication plans or additional elements to ensure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. In addition, if the FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority approves our product candidates, the manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion, import, export and recordkeeping for our products will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration, as well as continued compliance with cGMPs and GCP requirements for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with our products, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or

65

with our third-party manufacturers or manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in, among other things:

The occurrence of any event or penalty described above may inhibit our ability to commercialize our product candidates and generate revenue and could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity.

In addition, if any of our product candidates are approved, our product labeling, advertising and promotion will be subject to regulatory requirements and continuing regulatory review. The FDA strictly regulates the promotional claims that may be made about drug products. In particular, a product may not be promoted for uses that are not approved by the FDA as reflected in the product’s approved labeling. If we receive marketing approval for a product candidate, physicians may nevertheless, in their independent medical judgment, prescribe it to their patients in a manner that is inconsistent with the approved label. The FDA does not regulate the behavior of physicians in their choice of treatments but the FDA does restrict manufacturer’s communications on the subject of off-label use of their products. If we are found to have promoted such off-label uses, we may become subject to significant liability. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses, and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off-label uses may be subject to significant sanctions. The federal government has levied large civil and criminal fines against companies for alleged improper promotion and has enjoined several companies from engaging in off-label promotion. The FDA has also requested that companies enter into consent decrees or permanent injunctions under which specified promotional conduct is changed or curtailed.

The FDA’s and other regulatory authorities’ policies may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. In addition, the FDA’s and other regulatory authorities’ policies may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. We also cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. For example, the results of the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election may impact our business and industry. Namely, the Trump administration took several executive actions, including the issuance of a number of Executive Orders, that could impose significant burdens on, or otherwise materially delay, the FDA’s ability to engage in routine oversight activities such as implementing statutes through rulemaking, issuance of guidance, and review and approval of marketing applications. It is difficult to predict whether or how these orders will be implemented, or whether they will be rescinded and replaced under the Biden administration. The policies and priorities of the new administration are unknown and could materially impact the regulations governing our product candidates. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may be subject to enforcement action and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.

If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing

66

approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability, which would adversely affect our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

The commercial success of our product candidates will depend upon the degree of market acceptance of such product candidates by physicians, patients, healthcare payors and others in the medical community.

Our product candidates may not be commercially successful. Even if any of our product candidates receive regulatory approval, they may not gain market acceptance among physicians, patients, healthcare payors or the medical community. The commercial success of any of our current or future product candidates will depend significantly on the broad adoption and use of the resulting product by physicians and patients for approved indications. The degree of market acceptance of our products will depend on a number of factors, including:

If any product candidate is approved but does not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, hospitals, healthcare payors or patients, we may not generate sufficient revenue from that product and may not become or remain profitable. Our efforts to educate the medical community and third-party payors regarding the benefits of our products may require significant resources and may never be successful.

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

The FDA and other regulatory agencies strictly regulate the promotional claims that may be made about prescription products, as our product candidates would be, if approved. In particular, a product may not be promoted for uses that are not approved by the FDA or such other regulatory agencies as reflected in the product’s approved labeling. If we are found to have promoted such off-label uses, we may become subject to significant liability. The federal government has levied large civil and criminal fines against companies for alleged improper promotion and has enjoined several companies from engaging in off-label

67

promotion. The FDA has also required companies to enter into consent decrees or permanent injunctions under which specified promotional conduct is changed or curtailed. If we cannot successfully manage the promotion of our product candidates, if approved, we could become subject to significant liability, which would materially adversely affect our business and financial condition.

The successful commercialization of our product candidates, if approved, will depend in part on the extent to which governmental authorities and health insurers establish coverage, adequate reimbursement levels and favorable pricing policies. Failure to obtain or maintain coverage and adequate reimbursement for our products could limit our ability to market those products and decrease our ability to generate revenue.

The availability of coverage and the adequacy of reimbursement by governmental healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, private health insurers and other third-party payors are essential for most patients to be able to afford prescription medications such as our product candidates, if approved. Our ability to achieve coverage and acceptable levels of reimbursement for our products by third-party payors will have an effect on our ability to successfully commercialize those products. Moreover, we are initially developing product candidates targeting rare muscle disorders with small patient populations. In order for products that are designed to treat smaller patient populations to be commercially viable, the reimbursement for such products must be higher, on a relative basis, to account for the lack of volume. Accordingly, we will need to implement a coverage and reimbursement strategy for any approved product candidate with a smaller patient population that accounts for the smaller potential market size. Even if we obtain coverage for a given product by a third-party payor, the resulting reimbursement payment rates may not be adequate or may require co-payments that patients find unacceptably high. For products administered under the supervision of a physician, obtaining coverage and adequate reimbursement may be particularly difficult because of the higher prices often associated with such drugs. Additionally, separate reimbursement for the product itself or the treatment or procedure in which the product is used may not be available, which may impact physician utilization.

We cannot be sure that coverage and reimbursement in the United States, the European Union or elsewhere will be available for any product that we may develop, and any reimbursement that may become available may be decreased or eliminated in the future.

Third-party payors increasingly are challenging prices charged for biopharmaceutical products and services, and many third-party payors may refuse to provide coverage and reimbursement for particular drugs when an equivalent generic drug or a less expensive therapy is available. It is possible that a third-party payor may consider our products as substitutable and only offer to reimburse patients for the less expensive product. Even if we are successful in demonstrating improved efficacy or improved convenience of administration with our products, pricing of existing drugs may limit the amount we will be able to charge for our products. These payors may deny or revoke the reimbursement status of a given product or establish prices for new or existing marketed products at levels that are too low to enable us to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development. If reimbursement is not available or is available only at limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our products and may not be able to obtain a satisfactory financial return on products that we may develop.

There is significant uncertainty related to third-party payor coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products. In the United States, third-party payors, including private and governmental payors, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs, play an important role in determining the extent to which new drugs will be covered. Some third-party payors may require pre-approval of coverage for new or innovative devices or drug therapies before they will reimburse healthcare providers who use such therapies. It is difficult to predict at this time what third-party payors will decide with respect to the coverage and reimbursement for our products.

Obtaining and maintaining reimbursement status is time consuming, costly and uncertain. The Medicare and Medicaid programs increasingly are used as models for how private payors and other governmental payors develop their coverage and reimbursement policies for drugs. However, no uniform policy for coverage and reimbursement for products exists among third-party payors in the United States.

68

Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for products can differ significantly from payor to payor. As a result, the coverage determination process is often a time consuming and costly process that will require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our products to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be applied consistently or obtained in the first instance. Furthermore, rules and regulations regarding reimbursement change frequently, in some cases at short notice, and we believe that changes in these rules and regulations are likely.

Outside the United States, international operations are generally subject to extensive governmental price controls and other market regulations, and we believe the increasing emphasis on cost containment initiatives in Europe and other countries has and will continue to put pressure on the pricing and usage of our products. In many countries, the prices of medical products are subject to varying price control mechanisms as part of national health systems. Other countries allow companies to fix their own prices for medical products but monitor and control company profits. Additional foreign price controls or other changes in pricing regulation could restrict the amount that we are able to charge for our products. Accordingly, in markets outside the United States, the reimbursement for our products may be reduced compared with the United States and may be insufficient to generate commercially reasonable revenue and profits.

Moreover, increasing efforts by governmental and third-party payors in the United States and abroad to cap or reduce healthcare costs may cause such organizations to limit both coverage and the level of reimbursement for newly approved products and, as a result, they may not cover or provide adequate payment for our products. We expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of any of our products due to the trend toward managed healthcare, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations and additional legislative changes. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription drugs and surgical procedures and other treatments, has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products.

We face significant competition, and if our competitors develop technologies or product candidates more rapidly than we do or their technologies are more effective, our business and our ability to develop and successfully commercialize products may be adversely affected.

The biotechnology and biopharmaceutical industries are characterized by rapid advancing technologies, intense competition and a strong emphasis on proprietary and novel products and product candidates. Our competitors have developed, are developing or may develop products, product candidates and processes competitive with our product candidates. Any product candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize will compete with existing therapies and new therapies that may become available in the future. We believe that a significant number of products are currently under development, and may become commercially available in the future, for the treatment of conditions for which we may attempt to develop product candidates. In particular, there is intense competition amongst RNA targeted therapies. Our competitors include larger and better funded pharmaceutical, biopharmaceutical, biotechnological and therapeutics companies. Moreover, we may also compete with universities and other research institutions who may be active in the indications we are targeting and could be in direct competition with us. We also compete with these organizations to recruit management, scientists and clinical development personnel, which could negatively affect our level of expertise and our ability to execute our business plan. We will also face competition in establishing clinical trial sites, enrolling subjects for clinical trials and in identifying and in-licensing new product candidates. Smaller or early stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies.

We expect to face competition from existing products and products in development for each of our product candidates. With respect to AOC 1001, there are currently no approved therapies to treat the underlying cause of DM1. Products currently in development to treat DM1 include: tideglusib, a GSK3-ß inhibitor in late-stage clinical development by AMO Pharma for the congenital phenotype of DM1; AT466, which is an AAV-antisense candidate in preclinical development by Audentes Therapeutics, Inc.; an antibody linked oligonucleotide in preclinical development by Dyne Therapeutics Inc.; gene editing treatments in preclinical development by Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; an RNA-targeting gene therapy in preclinical development by Locana, Inc.; and small molecules interacting with RNA in preclinical

69

development by Expansion Therapeutics. There are a growing number of companies pursuing different paths to treat DM1 and we expect that the space will continue to evolve as additional candidates advance.

There are currently no therapies to treat the underlying cause of facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy, or FSHD. Products currently in development to treat FSHD include: creatine monohydrate, a supplement that enhances muscle performance, which is being evaluated in a Phase 2 clinical trial by Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, and losmapimod, a p38 MAPK inhibitor that may modulate DUX4 expression, which is being evaluated in a Phase 2 clinical trial by Fulcrum Therapeutics Inc. The only approved therapy for Pompe disease is Lumizyme (known as Myozyme outside of the United States), an ERT delivered by bi-weekly intravenous infusion, and marketed by Sanofi Genzyme. We are aware of multiple ERT therapies in clinical development, including AT-GAA, which uses a pharmacological chaperone, in a Phase 3 clinical trial by Amicus Therapeutics, Inc., and neoGAA in a Phase 3 clinical trial by Sanofi Genzyme. In addition, several companies are developing gene therapies, including Actus Therapeutics, Inc. (ACTUS101), Asklepios BioPharmaceutical, Inc. (AAV2/8-LSPhGAA), Audentes Therapeutics (AT845) and Spark Therapeutics, Inc. (SPK-3006).

Currently people with DMD are treated with corticosteroids to manage the inflammatory component of the disease. Deflazacort is an FDA approved corticosteroid marketed by PTC Therapeutics, Inc. In addition, there are three FDA approved exon skipping drugs marketed by Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc.: Eteplirsen, an unconjugated phosphorodiamidate morpholino oligomer, or PMO, approved for people with DMD amenable to skipping Exon 51; golodirsen for the treatment of people with DMD amenable to skipping Exon 53; and and casimersen for the treatment of DMD in patients with a confirmed mutation amenable to exon 45 skipping. There is an FDA-approved exon-skipping drug marketed by Nippon Shinyaku Co., Inc.: viltolarsen, an unconjugated PMO approved for people with DMD amenable to skipping Exon 53. Companies focused on developing treatments for DMD that target dystrophin mechanisms, as does our DMD program, include Sarepta Therapeutics with SRP-5051, a peptide PMO currently being evaluated in a Phase 2 clinical trial for patients amenable to Exon 51 skipping 51, and PTC Therapeutics with ataluren, a small molecule targeting nonsense mutations in a Phase 3 clinical trial. In addition, several companies are developing gene therapies, including Milo Biotechnology (AAV1-FS344), Pfizer (PF-06939926), Sarepta Therapeutics (SRP-9001 and Galgt2 gene therapy program), and Solid Biosciences Inc. (SGT-001). We are also aware of several companies targeting non-dystrophin mechanisms for the treatment of DMD.

Current treatments for muscle atrophy are primarily focused on nutritional intake and physical exercise. Other products in developments for muscle atrophy in cachexia include: adlumiz and AEZS-130, which are ghrelin agonists in a Phase 3 clinical trial by Helsinn Healthcare SA and a Phase 2 trial by Aeterna Zentaris Inc., respectively; GSK2881078, an androgen receptor modulator in Phase 2 clinical in development by GlaxoSmithKline plc; NGM120, a GSF15 inhibitor by NGM Biopharmaceuticals Inc.; and PF-06946860 in Phase 1 clinical development by Pfizer Inc.

We will also compete more generally with other companies developing alternative scientific and technological approaches, including other companies working to develop conjugates with oligonucleotides for extra-hepatic delivery, including Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Aro Biotherapeutics, Arrowhead Therapeutics, Dyne Therapeutics, Ionis Pharmaceuticals and Sarepta Therapeutics, as well as gene therapy and CRISPR approaches.

Many of our competitors have significantly greater financial, technical, manufacturing, marketing, sales and supply resources or experience than we do. If we successfully obtain approval for any product candidate, we will face competition based on many different factors, including the safety and effectiveness of our products, the ease with which our products can be administered and the extent to which patients accept relatively new routes of administration, the timing and scope of regulatory approvals for these products, the availability and cost of manufacturing, marketing and sales capabilities, price, reimbursement coverage and patent position. Competing products could present superior treatment alternatives, including by being more effective, safer, more convenient, less expensive or marketed and sold more effectively than any products we may develop. Competitive products or technological approaches may make any products we develop, or our AOC platform, obsolete or noncompetitive before we recover the expense of developing

70

and commercializing our product candidates. If we are unable to compete effectively, our opportunity to generate revenue from the sale of our products we may develop, if approved, could be adversely affected.

If the market opportunities for our products are smaller than we believe they are, our revenue may be adversely affected, and our business may suffer.

The precise incidence and prevalence for all the conditions we aim to address with our product candidates are unknown. Our projections of both the number of people who have these diseases, as well as the subset of people with these diseases who have the potential to benefit from treatment with our product candidates, are based on our beliefs and estimates. These estimates have been derived from a variety of sources, including the scientific literature, surveys of clinics, patient foundations or market research, and may prove to be incorrect. Further, new trials may change the estimated incidence or prevalence of these diseases. The total addressable market across all of our product candidates will ultimately depend upon, among other things, the diagnosis criteria included in the final label for each of our product candidates approved for sale for these indications, the availability of alternative treatments and the safety, convenience, cost and efficacy of our product candidates relative to such alternative treatments, acceptance by the medical community and patient access, drug pricing and reimbursement. The number of patients in the United States and other major markets and elsewhere may turn out to be lower than expected, patients may not be otherwise amenable to treatment with our products or new patients may become increasingly difficult to identify or gain access to, all of which would adversely affect our results of operations and our business. Further, even if we obtain significant market share for our product candidates, because some of our potential target populations are very small, we may never achieve profitability despite obtaining such significant market share.

We currently have no marketing and sales organization and have no experience as a company in commercializing products, and we may have to invest significant resources to develop these capabilities. If we are unable to establish marketing and sales capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our products, we may not be able to generate product revenue.

We have no internal sales, marketing or distribution capabilities, nor have we commercialized a product. If any of our product candidates ultimately receives regulatory approval, we must build a marketing and sales organization with technical expertise and supporting distribution capabilities to commercialize each such product in major markets, which will be expensive and time consuming, or collaborate with third parties that have direct sales forces and established distribution systems, either to augment our own sales force and distribution systems or in lieu of our own sales force and distribution systems. We have no prior experience as a company in the marketing, sale and distribution of biopharmaceutical products and there are significant risks involved in building and managing a sales organization, including our ability to hire, retain and incentivize qualified individuals, generate sufficient sales leads, provide adequate training to sales and marketing personnel and effectively manage a geographically dispersed sales and marketing team. Any failure or delay in the development of our internal sales, marketing and distribution capabilities would adversely impact the commercialization of these products. We may not be able to enter into collaborations or hire consultants or external service providers to assist us in sales, marketing and distribution functions on acceptable financial terms, or at all. In addition, our product revenues and our profitability, if any, may be lower if we rely on third parties for these functions than if we were to market, sell and distribute any products that we develop ourselves. We likely will have little control over such third parties, and any of them may fail to devote the necessary resources and attention to sell and market our products effectively. If we are not successful in commercializing our products, either on our own or through arrangements with one or more third parties, we may not be able to generate any future product revenue and we would incur significant additional losses.

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

Our future growth may depend, in part, on our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates in foreign markets. We are not permitted to market or promote any of our product candidates before we receive regulatory approval from applicable regulatory authorities in foreign markets, and we

71

may never receive such regulatory approvals for any of our product candidates. To obtain separate regulatory approval in many other countries we must comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements regarding safety and efficacy and governing, among other things, clinical trials, commercial sales, pricing and distribution of our product candidates. If we obtain regulatory approval of our product candidates and ultimately commercialize our products in foreign markets, we would be subject to additional risks and uncertainties, including:

Risks Related to Our Business Operations and Industry

Our operating results may fluctuate significantly, which makes our future operating results difficult to predict and could cause our operating results to fall below expectations or any guidance we may provide.

Our quarterly and annual operating results may fluctuate significantly, which makes it difficult for us to predict our future operating results. These fluctuations may occur due to a variety of factors, many of which are outside of our control, including, but not limited to:

72

The cumulative effects of these factors could result in large fluctuations and unpredictability in our quarterly and annual operating results. As a result, comparing our operating results on a period-to-period basis may not be meaningful. Investors should not rely on our past results as an indication of our future performance.

This variability and unpredictability could also result in our failing to meet the expectations of industry or financial analysts or investors for any period. If our revenue or operating results fall below the expectations of analysts or investors or below any forecasts we may provide to the market, or if the forecasts we provide to the market are below the expectations of analysts or investors, the price of our common stock could decline substantially. Such a stock price decline could occur even when we have met any previously publicly stated revenue or earnings guidance we may provide.

We are dependent on the services of our management and other clinical and scientific personnel, and if we are not able to retain these individuals or recruit additional management or clinical and scientific personnel, our business will suffer.

Our success depends in part on our continued ability to attract, retain and motivate highly qualified management, clinical and scientific personnel. We are highly dependent upon our senior management, particularly Arthur Levin, Ph.D., our Chief Scientific Officer, as well as our senior scientists and other members of our management team. The loss of services of any of these individuals could delay or prevent the successful development of our product pipeline, initiation or completion of our preclinical studies and clinical trials or the commercialization of our product candidates. Although we have executed employment agreements or offer letters with each member of our senior management team, these agreements are terminable at will with or without notice and, therefore, we may not be able to retain their services as expected. We do not currently maintain “key person” life insurance on the lives of our executives or any of our employees. This lack of insurance means that we may not have adequate compensation for the loss of the services of these individuals.

We will need to expand and effectively manage our managerial, operational, financial and other resources in order to successfully pursue our clinical development and commercialization efforts. We may not be successful in maintaining our unique company culture and continuing to attract or retain qualified management and scientific and clinical personnel in the future due to the intense competition for qualified personnel among biopharmaceutical, biotechnology and other businesses, particularly in the San Diego area. Our industry has experienced a high rate of turnover of management personnel in recent years. If we are not able to attract, integrate, retain and motivate necessary personnel to accomplish our business objectives, we may experience constraints that will significantly impede the achievement of our development objectives, our ability to raise additional capital and our ability to implement our business strategy.

We may encounter difficulties in managing our growth and expanding our operations successfully.

We had 71 full-time employees as of December 31, 2020. As we continue development and pursue the potential commercialization of our product candidates, as well as function as a public company, we will need to expand our financial, development, regulatory, manufacturing, marketing and sales capabilities or contract with third parties to provide these capabilities for us. As our operations expand, we expect that we will need to manage additional relationships with various strategic partners, suppliers and other third parties. Our future financial performance and our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates and to compete effectively will depend, in part, on our ability to manage any future growth effectively.

73

We are subject to various federal, state and foreign healthcare laws and regulations, which could increase compliance costs, and our failure to comply with these laws and regulations could harm our results of operations and financial condition.

Our business operations and current and future arrangements with investigators, healthcare professionals, consultants, third-party payors and customers expose us to broadly applicable foreign, federal and state fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations. These laws may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we conduct our operations, including how we research, market, sell and distribute any products for which we obtain marketing approval. Such laws include:

74

Efforts to ensure that our current and future business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve ongoing substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant penalties, including civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, integrity oversight and reporting obligations, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. Defending against any such actions can be costly, time-consuming and may require significant financial and personnel resources. Therefore, even if we are successful in defending against any such actions that may be brought against us, our business may be impaired. Further, if any of the physicians or other healthcare providers or entities with whom we expect to do business is found to be not in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to significant criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare program.

Recently enacted legislation, future legislation and healthcare reform measures may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain marketing approval for and commercialize our product candidates and may affect the prices we may set.

In the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system, including cost-containment measures that may reduce or limit coverage and reimbursement for newly approved drugs and affect our ability to profitably sell any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. In particular, there have been and continue to be a number of initiatives at the U.S. federal and state levels that seek to reduce healthcare costs and improve the quality of healthcare.

For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or collectively, the ACA, was enacted in the United States. Among the provisions of the Affordable Care Act of importance to our potential product candidates, the Affordable Care Act: established an annual, nondeductible fee on any entity that manufactures or imports specified branded prescription drugs and biologic agents; extended manufacturers’ Medicaid rebate liability to covered drugs dispensed to individuals who are enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations; expands eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs; expands the entities eligible for discounts under the Public Health program; increases the statutory minimum rebates a manufacturer must pay under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program; creates a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program; establishes a new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research; and establishes a Center for Medicare Innovation at CMS to test innovative payment and service delivery models to lower Medicare and Medicaid spending.

There remain judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA, as well as efforts by the current U.S. administration to repeal or replace certain aspects of the ACA. For example, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, or the Tax Act, included a provision repealing, effective January 1, 2019, the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the ACA on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year (commonly referred to as the individual mandate). On December 14, 2018, a U.S. District Court Judge in the Northern District of Texas ruled that the individual mandate is a critical and inseverable feature of the ACA, and therefore, because it was repealed as part of the Tax Act, the remaining provisions of the ACA are invalid as well. On December 18, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit affirmed the District Court’s decision that the individual mandate was unconstitutional but remanded the case back to the District Court to determine whether the remaining provisions of the ACA are invalid as well. The U.S. Supreme Court is currently reviewing the case, although it is unclear how the

75

Supreme Court will rule. It is also unclear how other efforts, if any, to challenge, repeal or replace the ACA will impact the ACA or our business.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. On August 2, 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011 was signed into law, which, among other things, resulted in reductions to Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect on April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect through 2030, with the exception of a temporary suspension from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021, unless additional Congressional action is taken. In addition, on January 2, 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years.

Further, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny in the United States of pharmaceutical pricing practices in light of the rising cost of prescription drugs. Such scrutiny has resulted in several recent congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for products. It is unclear whether the new Biden administration will continue to seek new legislative and/or administrative measures to control drug costs. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare and other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors.

At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. Legally mandated price controls on payment amounts by third-party payors or other restrictions could harm our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs. This could reduce the ultimate demand for our product candidates, if approved, or put pressure on our product pricing, which could negatively affect our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

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

If product liability lawsuits are brought against us, we may incur substantial liabilities and may be required to limit commercialization of our products.

We face an inherent risk of product liability as a result of the clinical trials of our product candidates and will face an even greater risk if we commercialize our product candidates. For example, we may be sued if our product candidates allegedly cause injury or are found to be otherwise unsuitable during product testing, manufacturing, marketing or sale. Any such product liability claims may include allegations of defects in manufacturing, defects in design, a failure to warn of dangers inherent in the product candidate, negligence, strict liability and a breach of warranties. Claims may be brought against us by clinical trial participants, patients or others using, administering or selling products that may be approved in the future. Claims could also be asserted under state consumer protection acts.

If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against product liability claims, we may incur substantial liabilities or be required to limit or cease the commercialization of our products. Even a successful defense

76

would require significant financial and management resources. Regardless of the merits or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:

We currently do not hold product liability insurance coverage, but will need to obtain this insurance coverage prior to commencing clinical trials of our product candidates. We may need to increase our insurance coverage as we expand our clinical trials or if we commence commercialization of our product candidates. Insurance coverage is increasingly expensive. Our inability to obtain and retain sufficient product liability insurance at an acceptable cost to protect against potential product liability claims could prevent or inhibit the commercialization of our product candidates. Although we will maintain such insurance, any claim that may be brought against us could result in a court judgment or settlement in an amount that is not covered, in whole or in part, by our insurance or that is in excess of the limits of our insurance coverage. Our insurance policies will also have various exclusions, and we may be subject to a product liability claim for which we have no coverage. We may have to pay any amounts awarded by a court or negotiated in a settlement that exceed our coverage limitations or that are not covered by our insurance, and we may not have, or be able to obtain, sufficient capital to pay such amounts.

Our insurance policies are expensive and only protect us from some business risks, which will leave us exposed to significant uninsured liabilities.

We do not carry insurance for all categories of risk that our business may encounter. Some of the policies we currently maintain include property, general liability, employment benefits liability, business automobile, workers’ compensation, malicious invasion of our electronic systems, directors’ and officers’, employment practices and fiduciary liability insurance, and plan to obtain product liability insurance coverage prior to commencing clinical trials. We do not know, however, if we will be able to maintain insurance with adequate levels of coverage. Any significant uninsured liability may require us to pay substantial amounts, which would adversely affect our financial position and results of operations.

We and any of our current and potential future collaborators will be required to report to regulatory authorities if any of our approved products cause or contribute to adverse medical events, and any failure to do so would result in sanctions that would materially harm our business.

If we or any of our current and potential future collaborators are successful in commercializing our products, the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities would require that we and such collaborators report certain information about adverse medical events if those products may have caused or contributed to those adverse events. The timing of our obligation to report would be triggered by the date we become aware of the adverse event as well as the nature of the event. We and any of our current or potential future collaborators or CROs may fail to report adverse events within the prescribed timeframe. If we or any of our current or potential future collaborators or CROs fail to comply with such reporting obligations, the FDA or a foreign regulatory authority could take action, including criminal prosecution, the imposition of civil monetary penalties, seizure of our products or delay in approval or clearance of future products.

77

The COVID-19 pandemic could adversely impact our business, including our preclinical studies, planned clinical trials and financial condition.

In December 2019, a novel strain of coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, and the disease that it causes, COVID-19, were identified in Wuhan, China. This virus continues to spread globally and is present in nearly every country and region in the world. The pandemic and government measures taken in response have also had a significant impact, both direct and indirect, on businesses and commerce, as worker shortages have occurred; supply chains have been disrupted; facilities and production have been suspended; and demand for certain goods and services, such as medical services and supplies, has spiked, while demand for other goods and services, such as travel, has fallen. In response to the COVID-19 outbreak, we have closed our executive offices with our administrative employees continuing their work remotely and limited the number of staff in our research and development laboratories. As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to spread around the globe, we may experience disruptions that could severely impact our business, preclinical studies, planned clinical trials and financial condition, including:

78

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to rapidly evolve. The extent to which the COVID-19 may impact our business, including our preclinical studies, planned clinical trials, and financial condition will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted with confidence, such as the continued geographic spread of the disease and its penetration into the general population, the duration of the pandemic, the timing and effectiveness of vaccine distribution, travel restrictions and social distancing in the United States and other countries, business closures or business disruptions and the effectiveness of actions taken in the United States and other countries to contain and treat the disease.

To the extent the COVID-19 pandemic adversely affects our business and financial results, it may also have the effect of heightening many of the other risks described in this section. In addition, if in the future there is a further outbreak of COVID-19 or a variation thereof, an outbreak of another highly infectious or contagious disease or other health concern, we may be subject to similar risks as posed by COVID-19.

Our business could be affected by litigation, government investigations and enforcement actions.

We currently operate in a number of jurisdictions in a highly regulated industry and we could be subject to litigation, government investigation and enforcement actions on a variety of matters in the United States or foreign jurisdictions, including, without limitation, intellectual property, regulatory, product liability, environmental, whistleblower, false claims, privacy, anti-kickback, anti-bribery, securities, commercial, employment and other claims and legal proceedings which may arise from conducting our business. Any determination that our operations or activities are not in compliance with existing laws or regulations could result in the imposition of fines, civil and criminal penalties, equitable remedies, including disgorgement, injunctive relief and/or other sanctions against us, and remediation of any such findings could have an adverse effect on our business operations.

Legal proceedings, government investigations and enforcement actions can be expensive and time consuming. An adverse outcome resulting from any such proceeding, investigations or enforcement actions could result in significant damages awards, fines, penalties, exclusion from the federal healthcare programs, healthcare debarment, injunctive relief, product recalls, reputational damage and modifications of our business practices, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Our employees and independent contractors, including principal investigators, CROs, consultants and vendors, may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements.

We are exposed to the risk that our employees and independent contractors, including principal investigators, CROs, consultants and vendors may engage in misconduct or other illegal activity. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless and/or negligent conduct or disclosure of unauthorized activities to us that violate: (i) the laws and regulations of the FDA and other similar regulatory requirements, including those laws that require the reporting of true, complete and accurate information to such authorities, (ii) manufacturing standards, including cGMP requirements, (iii) federal and state data privacy, security, fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations in the United States and abroad or (iv) laws that require the true, complete and accurate reporting of financial information or data. Activities subject to these laws also involve the improper use or misrepresentation of information obtained in the course of clinical trials, the creation of fraudulent data in our preclinical studies or clinical trials or illegal misappropriation of drug product, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation. It is not always possible to identify and deter misconduct by employees and other third parties, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to be in compliance with such laws or regulations. In addition, we are subject to the risk that a person or government could allege such fraud or other misconduct, even if none occurred. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or

79

asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business and financial results, including, without limitation, the imposition of significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, monetary fines, disgorgements, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs, imprisonment, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, additional reporting requirements and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws and curtailment of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.

We may engage in strategic transactions that could impact our liquidity, increase our expenses and present significant distractions to our management.

From time to time, we may consider strategic transactions, such as acquisitions of companies, asset purchases and out-licensing or in-licensing of intellectual property, products or technologies. Additional potential transactions that we may consider in the future include a variety of business arrangements, including spin-offs, strategic partnerships, joint ventures, restructurings, divestitures, business combinations and investments. Any future transactions could increase our near and long-term expenditures, result in potentially dilutive issuances of our equity securities, including our common stock, or the incurrence of debt, contingent liabilities, amortization expenses or acquired in-process research and development expenses, any of which could affect our financial condition, liquidity and results of operations. Future acquisitions may also require us to obtain additional financing, which may not be available on favorable terms or at all.

These transactions may never be successful and may require significant time and attention of our management. In addition, the integration of any business that we may acquire in the future may disrupt our existing business and may be a complex, risky and costly endeavor for which we may never realize the full benefits of the acquisition. Accordingly, although there can be no assurance that we will undertake or successfully complete any additional transactions of the nature described above, any additional transactions that we do complete could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

Our ability to use net operating loss carryforwards and other tax attributes may be limited.

We have incurred substantial losses during our history, do not expect to become profitable in the near future and may never achieve profitability. To the extent that we continue to incur losses for tax purposes, or NOLs, such NOLs will carry forward to offset future taxable income, if any, until such unused losses expire (if subject to expiration). At December 31, 2020, we had federal and state NOLs of approximately $40.2 million and $40.0 million, respectively.

Under the Tax Act, as modified by the CARES Act, federal NOLs generated in periods after December 31, 2017, may be carried forward indefinitely but may only be used to offset 80% of our taxable income in years beginning after December 31, 2020. Under the CARES Act, NOLs arising in tax years beginning after December 31, 2017 and before January 1, 2021 may be carried back to each of the five tax years preceding the tax year of such loss. Because we had no taxable income in our tax year ended December 31, 2019, which was our first corporate tax year, we do not anticipate that such provision of the CARES Act will be relevant to us. It is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to the Tax Act or the CARES Act.

In addition, our NOLs and other tax attributes are subject to review and possible adjustment by the IRS, and state tax authorities. Under Section 382 of the Code, our federal NOLs may become subject to an annual limitation in the event of certain cumulative changes in the ownership of our company. An “ownership change” pursuant to Section 382 of the Code generally occurs if one or more stockholders or groups of stockholders who own at least 5% of a company’s stock increase their ownership by more than 50 percentage points over their lowest ownership percentage within a rolling three-year period. Our ability to utilize our NOLs and other tax attributes to offset future taxable income or tax liabilities may be limited as a result of ownership changes, including potential changes in connection with our initial public offering, or

80

IPO, that was completed in June 2020 or future offerings. Similar rules may apply under state tax laws. We have not yet determined the amount of the cumulative change in our ownership resulting from our IPO or other transactions, or any resulting limitations on our ability to utilize our NOLs and other tax attributes. If we earn taxable income, such limitations could result in increased future income tax liability to us and our future cash flows could be adversely affected. We have recorded a full valuation allowance related to our NOLs and other deferred tax assets due to the uncertainty of the ultimate realization of the future benefits of those assets.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

If we are unable to obtain and maintain patent protection for our therapeutic programs and other proprietary technologies we develop, or if the scope of the patent protection obtained is not sufficiently broad, our competitors could develop and commercialize products and technology similar or identical to ours, and our ability to successfully commercialize our therapeutic programs and other proprietary technologies we may develop may be adversely affected.

Our success depends in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection in the United States and other countries with respect to our therapeutic programs and other proprietary technologies we may develop. We seek to protect our proprietary position, in part, by filing patent applications in the United States and abroad relating to our therapeutic programs and other proprietary technologies we may develop. If we are unable to obtain or maintain patent protection with respect to our therapeutic programs and other proprietary technologies we may develop, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially harmed.

Changes in either the patent laws or their interpretation in the United States and other countries may diminish our ability to protect our inventions, obtain, maintain and enforce our intellectual property rights and, more generally, could affect the value of our intellectual property or narrow the scope of our protection. We cannot predict whether the patent applications we are currently pursuing will issue as patents in any particular jurisdiction or whether the claims of any issued patents will provide sufficient protection against competitors or other third parties.

The patent prosecution process is expensive, time-consuming, and complex, and we may not be able to file, prosecute, maintain, enforce, or license all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. It is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output in time to obtain patent protection. Although we enter into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to confidential or patentable aspects of our research and development output, such as our employees, corporate collaborators, outside scientific collaborators, CROs, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose such output before a patent application is filed, thereby jeopardizing our ability to seek patent protection. In addition, our ability to obtain and maintain valid and enforceable patents depends on whether the differences between our inventions and the prior art allow our inventions to be patentable over the prior art.

Furthermore, publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing, or in some cases not at all. Therefore, we cannot be certain that we or our licensors were the first to make the inventions claimed in any of our owned or licensed patents or pending patent applications, or that we or our licensors were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions. The patent position of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions and has been the subject of much litigation in recent years. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain. Our patent applications may not result in patents being issued which protect our therapeutic programs and other proprietary technologies we may develop or which effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies and products.

81

Moreover, the claim coverage in a patent application can be significantly reduced before the patent is granted. Even if our patent applications issue as patents, they may not issue in a form that will provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent competitors or other third parties from competing with us or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. Any patents issuing from our patent applications may be challenged, narrowed, circumvented or invalidated by third parties. Consequently, we do not know whether our therapeutic programs and other proprietary technology will be protectable or remain protected by valid and enforceable patents. Even if a patent is granted, our competitors or other third parties may be able to circumvent the patent by developing similar or alternative technologies or products in a non-infringing manner which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In addition, given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of our therapeutic programs and eventual product candidates, patents protecting the product candidates might expire before or shortly after such product candidates are commercialized. As a result, our intellectual property may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.

The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity, or enforceability and our patents may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad. We may be subject to a third-party pre-issuance submission of prior art to the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or the USPTO, or become involved in opposition, derivation, revocation, reexamination, post-grant and inter partes review, or other similar proceedings challenging our patent rights. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation could reduce the scope of, or invalidate or render unenforceable, our patent rights, allow third parties to commercialize our therapeutic programs and other proprietary technologies we may develop and compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize products without infringing third-party patent rights. Such proceedings also may result in substantial cost and require significant time from our scientists and management, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us.

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

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

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology products, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our intellectual property and proprietary rights generally. In addition, some jurisdictions, such as Europe, Japan and China, may have a higher standard for patentability than in the United States, including, for example, the requirement of claims having literal support in the original patent filing and the limitation on using supporting data that is not in the original patent filing. Under those heightened patentability requirements, we may not be able to obtain sufficient patent protection in certain jurisdictions even though the same or similar patent protection can be secured in U.S. and other jurisdictions.

Proceedings to enforce our intellectual property and proprietary rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits

82

that we initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property and proprietary rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop.

Many countries have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In addition, many countries limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors. In these countries, the patent owner may have limited remedies, which could materially diminish the value of such patent. If we are forced to grant a license to third parties with respect to any patents relevant to our business, our competitive position may be impaired, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be adversely affected.

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

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees, and various other government fees on patents and applications will be due to be paid to the USPTO and various government patent agencies outside of the United States over the lifetime of our owned or licensed patents and applications. In certain circumstances, we rely on our licensing partners to pay these fees due to U.S. and non-U.S. patent agencies. The USPTO and various non-U.S. government agencies require compliance with several procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. We are also dependent on our licensors to take the necessary action to comply with these requirements with respect to our licensed intellectual property. In some cases, an inadvertent lapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules. There are situations, however, in which non-compliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in a partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. In such an event, potential competitors might be able to enter the market with similar or identical products or technology, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

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

Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of patent applications and the enforcement or defense of issued patents. Assuming that other requirements for patentability are met, prior to March 2013, in the United States, the first to invent the claimed invention was entitled to the patent, while outside the United States, the first to file a patent application was entitled to the patent.

After March 2013, under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the America Invents Act, enacted in September 2011, the United States transitioned to a first inventor to file system in which, assuming that other requirements for patentability are met, the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether a third party was the first to invent the claimed invention. A third party that files a patent application in the USPTO after March 2013, but before us could therefore be awarded a patent covering an invention of ours even if we had made the invention before it was made by such third party. This will require us to be cognizant going forward of the time from invention to filing of a patent application. Since patent applications in the United States and most other countries are confidential for a period of time after filing or until issuance, we cannot be certain that we were the first to either (i) file any patent application related to our therapeutic programs and other proprietary technologies we may develop or (ii) invent any of the inventions claimed in our patent applications.

The America Invents Act also includes a number of significant changes that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and also may affect patent litigation. These include allowing third party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent by USPTO administered post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review and derivation proceedings. Because of a lower evidentiary standard in USPTO proceedings

83

compared to the evidentiary standard in United States federal courts necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a claim invalid even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the claim if first presented in a district court action. Accordingly, a third party may attempt to use the USPTO procedures to invalidate our patent claims that would not have been invalidated if first challenged by the third party as a defendant in a district court action. Therefore, the America Invents Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of patents issuing from those patent applications, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

In addition, the patent positions of companies in the development and commercialization of biologics and pharmaceuticals are particularly uncertain. Recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings have narrowed the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances and weakened the rights of patent owners in certain situations. This combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the validity and enforceability of patents, once obtained. Depending on future actions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that could have a material adverse effect on our existing patent portfolio and our ability to protect and enforce our intellectual property in the future.

Issued patents covering our therapeutic programs and other proprietary technologies we may develop could be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged in court or before administrative bodies in the United States or abroad.

If we initiated legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering our therapeutic programs and other proprietary technologies we may develop, the defendant could counterclaim that such patent is invalid or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, including lack of novelty, obviousness or non-enablement. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could be an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant information from the USPTO, or made a misleading statement, during prosecution. Third parties may raise claims challenging the validity or enforceability of a patent before administrative bodies in the United States or abroad, even outside the context of litigation. Such mechanisms include re-examination, post-grant review, inter partes review, derivation proceedings, and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions (e.g., opposition proceedings). Such proceedings could result in the revocation of, cancellation of or amendment to our patents in such a way that they no longer cover our therapeutic programs and other proprietary technologies we may develop. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. With respect to the validity question, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art, of which we or our licensing partners and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. If a third party were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on our therapeutic programs and other proprietary technologies we may develop. Such a loss of patent protection would have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

If we do not obtain patent term extension for our product candidate, our business may be materially harmed.

Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of any FDA marketing approval of any product candidate we may develop, one or more of patents issuing from our U.S. patent applications may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Action of 1984, or the Hatch-Waxman Amendments. The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent term extension, or PTE, of up to five years as compensation for patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process. A PTE cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval, only one patent may be extended and only those claims covering the approved drug, a method for using it or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. Similar patent term restoration

84

provisions to compensate for commercialization delay caused by regulatory review are also available in certain foreign jurisdictions, such as in Europe under Supplemental Protection Certificate, or SPC.

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

We may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an interest in our patent rights, trade secrets, or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. For example, we may have inventorship disputes arise from conflicting obligations of consultants or others who are involved in developing our therapeutic programs and other proprietary technologies we may develop. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship or our patent rights, trade secrets or other intellectual property. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, intellectual property that is important to our therapeutic programs and other proprietary technologies we may develop. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to our management and other employees. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, our business and competitive position would be harmed.

In addition to seeking patent protection for our therapeutic programs and other proprietary technologies we may develop, we also rely on trade secrets and confidentiality agreements to protect our unpatented know-how, technology, and other proprietary information and to maintain our competitive position. With respect to our AOC platform and development programs, we consider trade secrets and know-how to be one of our important sources of intellectual property, including our extensive knowledge of the modulation of RNA processes using oligonucleotides and siRNA, oligonucleotide drug delivery techniques and antibody conjugation. Trade secrets and know-how can be difficult to protect. In particular, the trade secrets and know-how in connection with our AOC platform, development programs and other proprietary technology we may develop may over time be disseminated within the industry through independent development, the publication of journal articles describing the methodology and the movement of personnel with scientific positions in academic and industry.

We seek to protect these trade secrets and other proprietary technology, in part, by entering into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to them, such as our employees, corporate collaborators, outside scientific collaborators, CROs, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties. We also enter into confidentiality and invention or patent assignment agreements with our employees and consultants. We cannot guarantee that we have entered into such agreements with each party that may have or have had access to our trade secrets or proprietary technology and processes. 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 competitive position would be materially and adversely harmed.

We may be subject to claims that third parties have an ownership interest in our trade secrets. For example, we may have disputes arise from conflicting obligations of our employees, consultants or others who are involved in developing our product candidate. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging ownership of our trade secrets. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable trade secret rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, trade secrets that are important to our therapeutic programs and other

85

proprietary technologies we may develop. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to our management and other employees.

We may not be successful in obtaining necessary rights to any product candidate we may develop through acquisitions and in-licenses.

We currently solely own intellectual property rights covering our therapeutic programs. Other pharmaceutical companies and academic institutions may also have filed or are planning to file patent applications potentially relevant to our business. In order to avoid infringing these third-party patents, we may find it necessary or prudent to obtain licenses to such patents from such third-party intellectual property holders. However, we may be unable to secure such licenses or otherwise acquire or in-license any compositions, methods of use, processes or other intellectual property rights from third parties that we identify as necessary for our therapeutic programs and other proprietary technologies we may develop.

The licensing or acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and several more established companies may pursue strategies to license or acquire third party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive or necessary. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, capital resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. We also may be unable to license or acquire third party intellectual property rights on terms that would allow us to make an appropriate return on our investment or at all. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third party intellectual property rights or maintain the existing intellectual property rights we have, we may have to abandon development of the relevant program or product candidate, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We may be subject to claims that our employees, consultants or advisors have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged trade secrets of their current or former employers or claims asserting ownership of what we regard as our own intellectual property.

Some of our employees, consultants and advisors are currently or were previously employed at universities or other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Although we try to ensure that our employees, consultants and advisors do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we or these individuals have used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any such individual’s current or former employer. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to our management.

In addition, while it is our policy to require our employees and contractors who may be involved in the conception or development of intellectual property to execute agreements assigning such intellectual property to us, we may be unsuccessful in executing such an agreement with each party who, in fact, conceives or develops intellectual property that we regard as our own. The assignment of intellectual property rights may not be self-executing, or the assignment agreements may be breached, and we may be forced to bring claims against third parties, or defend claims that they may bring against us, to determine the ownership of what we regard as our intellectual property. Such claims could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Third-party claims of intellectual property infringement, misappropriation or other violations against us or our collaborators may prevent or delay the development and commercialization of our therapeutic programs and other proprietary technologies we may develop.

Our commercial success depends in part on our ability to avoid infringing, misappropriating and otherwise violating the patents and other intellectual property rights of third parties. There is a substantial

86

amount of complex litigation involving patents and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, as well as administrative proceedings for challenging patents, including interference, derivation and reexamination proceedings before the USPTO or oppositions and other comparable proceedings in foreign jurisdictions. As discussed above, recently, due to changes in U.S. law referred to as patent reform, new procedures including inter partes review and post-grant review have also been implemented. As stated above, this reform adds uncertainty to the possibility of challenge to our patents in the future.

Numerous U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications owned by third parties exist in the fields in which we are commercializing or plan to commercialize our therapeutic programs and in which we are developing other proprietary technologies. As the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries expand and more patents are issued, the risk increases that our therapeutic programs and commercializing activities may give rise to claims of infringement of the patent rights of others. We cannot assure you that our therapeutic programs and other proprietary technologies we may develop will not infringe existing or future patents owned by third parties. We may not be aware of patents that have already been issued and that a third party, for example, a competitor in the fields in which we are developing our therapeutic programs, might assert as infringed by us. It is also possible that patents owned by third parties of which we are aware, but which we do not believe we infringe or that we believe we have valid defenses to any claims of patent infringement, could be found to be infringed by us. It is not unusual that corresponding patents issued in different countries have different scopes of coverage, such that in one country a third-party patent does not pose a material risk, but in another country, the corresponding third-party patent may pose a material risk to our planned products. As such, we monitor third-party patents in the relevant pharmaceutical markets. In addition, because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending patent applications that may later result in issued patents that we may infringe.

In the event that any third party claims that we infringe their patents or that we are otherwise employing their proprietary technology without authorization and initiates litigation against us, even if we believe such claims are without merit, a court of competent jurisdiction could hold that such patents are valid, enforceable and infringed by us. In this case, the holders of such patents may be able to block our ability to commercialize the infringing products or technologies unless we obtain a license under the applicable patents, or until such patents expire or are finally determined to be held invalid or unenforceable. Such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we are able to obtain a license, the license would likely obligate us to pay license fees or royalties or both, and the rights granted to us might be nonexclusive, which could result in our competitors gaining access to the same intellectual property. If we are unable to obtain a necessary license to a third-party patent on commercially reasonable terms, we may be unable to commercialize the infringing products or technologies or such commercialization efforts may be significantly delayed, which could in turn significantly harm our business.

Defense of infringement claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of management and other employee resources from our business, and may impact our reputation. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may be enjoined from further developing or commercializing the infringing products or technologies. In addition, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, obtain one or more licenses from third parties, pay royalties and/or redesign our infringing products or technologies, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. In that event, we would be unable to further develop and commercialize our product candidate or technologies, which could harm our business significantly. Further, we cannot predict whether any required license would be available at all or whether it would be available on commercially reasonable terms. In the event that we could not obtain a license, we may be unable to further develop our product candidate and commercialize our product, if approved, which could harm our business significantly. Even if we are able to obtain a license, the license would likely obligate us to pay license fees or royalties or both, and the rights granted to us might be nonexclusive, which could result in our competitors gaining access to the same intellectual property. Ultimately, we could be prevented from commercializing a product, or be forced to cease some aspect of our business operations, if, as a result of actual or threatened patent infringement claims, we are unable to enter into licenses on acceptable terms.

87

Engaging in litigation defending against third parties alleging infringement of patent and other intellectual property rights is very expensive, particularly for a company of our size, and time-consuming. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of litigation or administrative proceedings more effectively than we can because of greater financial resources. Patent litigation and other proceedings may also absorb significant management time. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could impair our ability to compete in the marketplace. The occurrence of any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

We may in the future pursue invalidity proceedings with respect to third-party patents. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity is unpredictable. Even if resolved in our favor, these legal proceedings may cause us to incur significant expenses and could distract our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a substantial adverse effect on the price of our common stock. Such proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing or distribution activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to conduct such proceedings adequately. Some of these third parties may be able to sustain the costs of such proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources. If we do not prevail in the patent proceedings the third parties may assert a claim of patent infringement directed at our product candidates.

We may become involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents and other intellectual property rights, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful.

Third parties, such as a competitor, may infringe our patent rights. In an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent owned by us is invalid or unenforceable or may refuse to stop the other party from using the invention at issue on the grounds that the patent does not cover the technology in question. In addition, our patent rights may become involved in inventorship, priority or validity disputes. To counter or defend against such claims can be expensive and time consuming. An adverse result in any litigation proceeding could put our patent rights at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation.

Even if resolved in our favor, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims may cause us to incur significant expenses and could distract our personnel from their normal responsibilities. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments, and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a substantial adverse effect on the price of our common stock. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing or distribution activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to conduct such litigation or proceedings adequately. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources and more mature and developed intellectual property portfolios. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete in the marketplace.

If our trademarks and trade names are not adequately protected, then we may not be able to build name recognition in our markets of interest and our business may be adversely affected.

Our registered or unregistered trademarks or trade names may be challenged, infringed, circumvented or declared generic or determined to be infringing on other marks. During trademark registration proceedings, we may receive rejections of our applications by the USPTO or in other foreign jurisdictions. Although we are given an opportunity to respond to those rejections, we may be unable to overcome such rejections. In addition, in the USPTO and in comparable agencies in many foreign

88

jurisdictions, third parties are given an opportunity to oppose pending trademark applications and to seek to cancel registered trademarks. Opposition or cancellation proceedings may be filed against our trademarks, which may not survive such proceedings. Moreover, any name we have proposed to use with our product candidate in the United States must be approved by the FDA, regardless of whether we have registered it, or applied to register it, as a trademark. Similar requirements exist in Europe. The FDA typically conducts a review of proposed product names, including an evaluation of potential for confusion with other product names. If the FDA or an equivalent administrative body in a foreign jurisdiction objects to any of our proposed proprietary product names, we may be required to expend significant additional resources in an effort to identify a suitable substitute name that would qualify under applicable trademark laws, not infringe the existing rights of third parties and be acceptable to the FDA. Furthermore, in many countries, owning and maintaining a trademark registration may not provide an adequate defense against a subsequent infringement claim asserted by the owner of a senior trademark.

We may not be able to protect our rights to these trademarks and trade names, which we need to build name recognition among potential partners or customers in our markets of interest. At times, competitors or other third parties may adopt trade names or trademarks similar to ours, thereby impeding our ability to build brand identity and possibly leading to market confusion. In addition, there could be potential trade name or trademark infringement claims brought by owners of other registered trademarks or trademarks that incorporate variations of our registered or unregistered trademarks or trade names. Over the long term, if we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, then we may not be able to compete effectively and our business may be adversely affected. Our efforts to enforce or protect our proprietary rights related to trademarks, trade names, domain name or other intellectual property may be ineffective and could result in substantial costs and diversion of resources and could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Intellectual property rights do not necessarily address all potential threats.

The degree of future protection afforded by our intellectual property rights is uncertain because intellectual property rights have limitations and may not adequately protect our business or permit us to maintain our competitive advantage. For example:

89

We partially depend on intellectual property licensed from third parties, and our licensors may not always act in our best interest. If we fail to comply with our obligations under our intellectual property licenses, if the licenses are terminated or if disputes regarding these licenses arise, we could lose significant rights that are important to our business.

We are dependent, in part, on patents, know-how and proprietary technology licensed from others. Our licenses to such patents, know-how and proprietary technology may not provide exclusive rights in all relevant fields of use and in all territories in which we may wish to develop or commercialize our products in the future. The agreements under which we license patents, know-how and proprietary technology from others are complex, and certain provisions in such agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations.

For example, we are a party to an exclusive option agreement to obtain an exclusive worldwide license with the University of Alberta, pursuant to which we have the option to in-license key patent applications for our Exon 51 skipping AOC for DMD and future product candidates. If we decide to exercise this option, this agreement imposes various diligence, milestone payment, royalty, insurance and other obligations on us and any future license agreements we enter into may do the same. If we fail to comply with obligations under any license agreements, our licensors may have the right to terminate our license, in which event we would not be able to develop or market technology or product candidates covered by the intellectual property licensed under these agreements. In addition, we may need to obtain additional licenses from our existing licensors and others to advance our research or allow commercialization of product candidates we may develop. It is possible that we may be unable to obtain any additional licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. In either event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to redesign our technology, product candidates, or the methods for manufacturing them or to develop or license replacement technology, all of which may not be feasible on a technical or commercial basis. If we are unable to do so, we may be unable to develop or commercialize the affected technology or product candidates.

If we or our licensors fail to adequately protect our licensed intellectual property, our ability to commercialize product candidates could suffer. We do not have complete control over the maintenance, prosecution and litigation of our in-licensed patents and patent applications and may have limited control over future intellectual property that may be in-licensed. For example, we cannot be certain that activities such as the maintenance and prosecution by our licensors have been or will be conducted in compliance with applicable laws and regulations or will result in valid and enforceable patents and other intellectual property rights. It is possible that our licensors’ infringement proceedings or defense activities may be less vigorous than had we conducted them ourselves or may not be conducted in accordance with our best interests.

In addition, the resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant patents, know-how and proprietary technology, or increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement. Disputes that may arise between us and our licensors regarding intellectual property subject to a license agreement could include disputes regarding:

90

If disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected technology or product candidates. As a result, any termination of or disputes over our intellectual property licenses could result in the loss of our ability to develop and commercialize our AOC platform, or AOC products, or we could lose other significant rights, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

For example, our agreements with certain of our third-party research partners provide that improvements developed in the course of our relationship may be owned solely by either us or our third-party research partner, or jointly between us and the third party. If we determine that rights to such improvements owned solely by a research partner or other third party with whom we collaborate are necessary to commercialize our product candidates or maintain our competitive advantage, we may need to obtain a license from such third party in order to use the improvements and continue developing, manufacturing or marketing our product candidates. We may not be able to obtain such a license on an exclusive basis, on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, which could prevent us from commercializing our product candidates or allow our competitors or others the chance to access technology that is important to our business. We also may need the cooperation of any co-owners of our intellectual property in order to enforce such intellectual property against third parties, and such cooperation may not be provided to us.

We may not be successful in obtaining or maintaining necessary rights to product components and processes for our development pipeline through acquisitions and in-licenses.

The growth of our business may depend in part on our ability to acquire, in-license or use third-party proprietary rights. For example, our product candidates may require specific formulations to work effectively and efficiently, we may develop product candidates containing our compounds and pre-existing pharmaceutical compounds, or we may be required by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities to provide a companion diagnostic test or tests with our product candidates, any of which could require us to obtain rights to use intellectual property held by third parties. In addition, with respect to any patents we may co-own with third parties, we may require licenses to such co-owners’ interest to such patents. We may be unable to acquire or in-license any compositions, methods of use, processes or other third-party intellectual property rights from third parties that we identify as necessary or important to our business operations. In addition, we may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. Were that to happen, we may need to cease use of the compositions or methods covered by those third-party intellectual property rights, and may need to seek to develop alternative approaches that do not infringe on those intellectual property rights, which may entail additional costs and development delays, even if we were able to develop such alternatives, which may not be feasible. Even if we are able to obtain a license, it may be non-exclusive, which means that our competitors may also receive access to the same technologies licensed to us. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to develop or license replacement technology.

Additionally, we sometimes collaborate with academic institutions to accelerate our preclinical research or development under written agreements with these institutions. In certain cases, these institutions provide us with an option to negotiate a license to any of the institution’s rights in technology resulting from the collaboration. Even if we hold such an option, we may be unable to negotiate a license from the institution within the specified timeframe or under terms that are acceptable to us. If we are unable to do so, the institution may offer the intellectual property rights to others, potentially blocking our ability to pursue our program.

The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and companies that may be more established or have greater resources than we do may also be pursuing strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider necessary or attractive in order to commercialize our product candidates. More established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, cash resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. There can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully complete these types of negotiations and ultimately acquire the rights to the intellectual property surrounding the

91

additional product candidates that we may seek to develop or market. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property or to maintain the existing intellectual property rights we have, we may have to abandon development of certain programs and our business financial condition, results of operations and prospects could suffer.

We, our collaborators and our service providers may be subject to a variety of privacy and data security laws and contractual obligations, which could increase compliance costs and our failure to comply with them could subject us to potentially significant fines or penalties and otherwise harm our business.

We maintain a large quantity of sensitive information, including confidential business and patient health information in connection with our preclinical studies, and are subject to laws and regulations governing the privacy and security of such information. The global data protection landscape is rapidly evolving, and we may be affected by or subject to new, amended or existing laws and regulations in the future, including as our operations continue to expand or if we operate in foreign jurisdictions. These laws and regulations may be subject to differing interpretations, which adds to the complexity of processing personal information. Guidance on implementation and compliance practices are often updated or otherwise revised.

In the United States, there are numerous federal and state privacy and data security laws and regulations governing the collection, use, disclosure and protection of personal information, including federal and state health information privacy laws, security breach notification laws and consumer protection laws. Each of these laws is subject to varying interpretations and constantly evolving. By way of example, the regulations promulgated under HIPAA and the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act impose privacy and security requirements and breach reporting obligations with respect to individually identifiable health information upon “covered entities” (health plans, health care clearinghouses and certain health care providers), and their respective business associates, individuals or entities that create, receive, maintain or transmit protected health information in connection with providing a service for or on behalf of a covered entity. The HIPAA breach notification rule mandates the reporting of certain breaches of health information to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, affected individuals and if the breach is large enough, the media. Entities that are found to be in violation of HIPAA as the result of a breach of unsecured protected health information, a complaint about privacy practices or an audit by HHS, may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative fines and penalties and/or additional reporting and oversight obligations if required to enter into a resolution agreement and corrective action plan with HHS to settle allegations of HIPAA non-compliance. Even when HIPAA does not apply, according to the FTC failing to take appropriate steps to keep consumers’ personal information secure may constitute unfair acts or practices in or affecting commerce in violation of Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act. The FTC expects a company’s data security measures to be reasonable and appropriate in light of the sensitivity and volume of consumer information it holds, the size and complexity of its business and the cost of available tools to improve security and reduce vulnerabilities. Individually identifiable health information is considered sensitive data that merits stronger safeguards.

In addition, certain state laws govern the privacy and security of health-related and other personal information in certain circumstances, some of which are more stringent than HIPAA and many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts. By way of example, the CCPA, which went into effect on January 1, 2020, gives California residents expanded rights to access and delete their personal information, opt out of certain personal information sharing, and receive detailed information about how their personal information is used. The CCPA provides for civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action for data breaches that is expected to increase data breach litigation. The CCPA may increase our compliance costs and potential liability. Some observers have noted that the CCPA could mark the beginning of a trend toward more stringent privacy legislation in the United States, which could increase our potential liability and adversely affect our business. Further, the CPRA recently passed in California. The CPRA will impose additional data protection obligations on covered businesses, including additional consumer rights processes, limitations on data uses, new audit requirements for higher risk data, and opt outs for certain uses of sensitive data. It will also create a new California data protection agency authorized to issue substantive regulations and could result in

92

increased privacy and information security enforcement. The majority of the provisions will go into effect on January 1, 2023, and additional compliance investment and potential business process changes may be required. In the event that we are subject to or affected by HIPAA, the CCPA, the CPRA or other domestic privacy and data protection laws, any liability from failure to comply with the requirements of these laws could adversely affect our financial condition.

In Europe, the GDPR took effect in May 2018. The GDPR governs the collection, use, disclosure, transfer or other processing of personal data of individuals within the EEA. Among other things, the GDPR imposes requirements regarding the security of personal data and notification of data processing obligations to the competent national data processing authorities, changes the lawful bases on which personal data can be processed, expands the definition of personal data and requires changes to informed consent practices, as well as detailed notices for clinical trial subjects and investigators. In addition, the GDPR increases the scrutiny of transfers of personal data from clinical trial sites located in the EEA to the United States and other jurisdictions that the European Commission does not recognize as having “adequate” data protection laws, and imposes substantial fines for breaches and violations (up to the greater of €20 million or 4% of our consolidated annual worldwide gross revenue). For example, in 2016, the EU and United States agreed to a transfer framework for data transferred from the EU to the United States, called the Privacy Shield, but the Privacy Shield was invalidated in July 2020 by the Court of Justice of the European Union. The GDPR also confers a private right of action on data subjects and consumer associations to lodge complaints with supervisory authorities, seek judicial remedies and obtain compensation for damages resulting from violations of the GDPR. Further, from January 1, 2021, companies have to comply with the GDPR and also the United Kingdom GDPR (UK GDPR), which, together with the amended UK Data Protection Act 2018, retains the GDPR in UK national law. The UK GDPR mirrors the fines under the GDPR, i.e., fines up to the greater of ���20 million (£17.5 million) or 4% of global turnover. The relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union in relation to certain aspects of data protection law remains unclear, and it is unclear how United Kingdom data protection laws and regulations will develop in the medium to longer term, and how data transfers to and from the United Kingdom will be regulated in the long term. Currently there is a four to six-month grace period agreed in the EU and United Kingdom Trade and Cooperation Agreement, ending June 30, 2021 at the latest, whilst the parties discuss an adequacy decision. However, it is not clear whether (and when) an adequacy decision may be granted by the European Commission enabling data transfers from EU member states to the United Kingdom long term without additional measures. These changes may lead to additional costs and increase our overall risk exposure. Compliance with these and any other applicable privacy and data security laws and regulations is a rigorous and time-intensive process, and we may be required to put in place additional mechanisms ensuring compliance with the new data protection rules. If we fail to comply with any such laws or regulations, we may face significant fines and penalties that could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our use of open source software could impose limitations on our ability to commercialize our product candidates.

Our use of open source software could impose limitations on our ability to commercialize our product candidates. As a result, as we seek to use our platform in connection with commercially available products, we may be required to license that software under different license terms, which may not be possible on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. If we are unable to license software components on terms that permit its use for commercial purposes, we may be required to replace those software components, which could result in delays, additional cost and additional regulatory approvals.

Use and distribution of open source software may entail greater risks than use of third-party commercial software, as open source licensors generally do not provide warranties or other contractual protections regarding infringement claims or the quality of the software code. Some open source licenses contain requirements that we make available source code for modifications or derivative works we create based upon the type of open source software we use. If we combine our proprietary software with open source software in a certain manner, we could, under certain of the open source licenses, be required to release the source code of our proprietary software to the public. This could allow our competitors to create similar products with lower development effort and time, and ultimately could result in a loss of product

93

sales for us. Although we monitor our use of open source software, the terms of many open source licenses have not been interpreted by U.S. courts, and there is a risk that those licenses could be construed in a manner that could impose unanticipated conditions or restrictions on our ability to commercialize our product candidates. We could be required to seek licenses from third parties in order to continue offering our product candidates, to re-engineer our product candidates or to discontinue the sale of our product candidates in the event re-engineering cannot be accomplished on a timely basis, any of which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Should any of these events occur, they could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

Risks Related to Our Common Stock

Prior to our IPO, there was no public market for our common stock, and an active, liquid and orderly market for our common stock may not be maintained.

Prior to our IPO, there was no public market for our common stock. Our common stock only recently began trading on the Nasdaq Global Market, or Nasdaq, but we can provide no assurance that we will be able to maintain an active trading market for our common stock. Even if an active trading market is developed, it may not be sustained. The lack of an active market may impair your ability to sell your shares at the time you wish to sell them or at a price that you consider reasonable. An inactive market may also impair our ability to raise capital by selling shares and may impair our ability to acquire other businesses or technologies using our shares as consideration, which, in turn, could materially adversely affect our business.

The trading price of the shares of our common stock could be highly volatile, and purchasers of our common stock could incur substantial losses.

Our stock price is likely to be volatile. The stock market in general and the market for stock of biopharmaceutical companies in particular have experienced extreme volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies. As a result of this volatility, investors may not be able to sell their common stock at or above the price at which they paid. The market price for our common stock may be influenced by those factors discussed in this “Risk Factors” section and many others, including:

94

In addition, in the past, stockholders have initiated class action lawsuits against biopharmaceutical companies following periods of volatility in the market prices of these companies’ stock. Such litigation, if instituted against us, could cause us to incur substantial costs and divert our management’s attention and resources, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our executive officers, directors and principal stockholders, if they choose to act together, will continue to have the ability to control or significantly influence all matters submitted to stockholders for approval.

At December 31, 2020, our executive officers, directors and greater than 5% stockholders, in the aggregate, own approximately 34% of our outstanding common stock. As a result, such persons, acting together, have the ability to significantly influence all matters submitted to our board of directors or stockholders for approval, including the appointment of our management, the election and removal of directors and approval of any significant transaction, as well as our management and business affairs. This concentration of ownership may have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control, impeding a merger, consolidation, takeover or other business combination involving us, or discouraging a potential acquiror from making a tender offer or otherwise attempting to obtain control of our business, even if such a transaction would benefit other stockholders.

We do not currently intend to pay dividends on our common stock, and, consequently, your ability to achieve a return on your investment will depend on appreciation, if any, in the price of our common stock.

We have never declared or paid any cash dividend on our common stock. We currently anticipate that we will retain future earnings for the development, operation and expansion of our business and do not anticipate declaring or paying any cash dividends for the foreseeable future. In addition, the terms of any future debt agreements may preclude us from paying dividends. Any return to stockholders will therefore be limited to the appreciation of their stock. There is no guarantee that shares of our common stock will appreciate in value or even maintain the price at which stockholders have purchased their shares.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock by our existing stockholders in the public market could cause our stock price to fall.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market or the perception that these sales might occur could significantly reduce the market price of our common stock and impair our ability to raise adequate capital through the sale of additional equity securities.

The holders of 10,860,802 shares of our outstanding common stock, or approximately 29% of our total outstanding common stock based on shares outstanding as of December 31, 2020, will be entitled to

95

rights with respect to the registration of their shares under the Securities Act. Registration of these shares under the Securities Act would result in the shares becoming freely tradable without restriction under the Securities Act, except for shares held by affiliates, as defined in Rule 144 under the Securities Act. Any sales of securities by these stockholders, or the registration of such shares, could have a material adverse effect on the trading price of our common stock.

We are an emerging growth company, and the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging growth companies may make our common stock less attractive to investors.

We are an emerging growth company, as defined in the JOBS Act, and may remain an emerging growth company until the last day of the fiscal year following the completion of our IPO. However, if certain events occur prior to the end of such five-year period, including if we become a “large accelerated filer,” our annual gross revenues exceed $1.07 billion or we issue more than $1.0 billion of non-convertible debt in any three-year period, we will cease to be an emerging growth company prior to the end of such five-year period. For so long as we remain an emerging growth company, we are permitted and intend to rely on exemptions from certain disclosure requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies.

These exemptions include:

We cannot predict whether investors will find our common stock less attractive if we rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and our stock price may be reduced or more volatile. In addition, the JOBS Act provides that an emerging growth company can take advantage of an extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards. This allows an emerging growth company to delay the adoption of these accounting standards until they would otherwise apply to private companies. We have elected to avail ourselves of this exemption and, therefore, we will not be subject to the same new or revised accounting standards as other public companies that are not emerging growth companies.

Provisions in our charter documents and under Delaware law could discourage a takeover that stockholders may consider favorable and may lead to entrenchment of management.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws contain provisions that could significantly reduce the value of our shares to a potential acquiror or delay or prevent changes in control or changes in our management without the consent of our board of directors. The provisions in our charter documents include the following:

96

We are also subject to the anti-takeover provisions contained in Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law. Under Section 203, a corporation may not, in general, engage in a business combination with any holder of 15% or more of its capital stock unless the holder has held the stock for three years or, among other exceptions, the board of directors has approved the transaction.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provide that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the exclusive forum for substantially all disputes between us and our stockholders, which could limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers or employees.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provide that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the exclusive forum for any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf, any action asserting a breach of fiduciary duty, any action asserting a claim against us arising pursuant to the Delaware General Corporation Law, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or our amended and restated bylaws, or any action asserting a claim against us that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine; provided, that, this provision would not apply to suits brought to enforce a duty or liability created by the Exchange Act. Furthermore, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation also provides that unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the federal district courts of the United States shall be the exclusive forum for the resolution of any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act. These choice of forum provisions may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or other employees, which

97

may discourage such lawsuits against us and our directors, officers and other employees. By agreeing to this provision, however, stockholders will not be deemed to have waived our compliance with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder. Furthermore, the enforceability of similar choice of forum provisions in other companies’ certificates of incorporation has been challenged in legal proceedings, and it is possible that a court could find these types of provisions to be inapplicable or unenforceable. If a court were to find the choice of forum provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could adversely affect our business and financial condition.

General Risk Factors

We and any of our third-party manufacturers or suppliers may use potent chemical agents and hazardous materials, and any claims relating to improper handling, storage or disposal of these materials could be time consuming or costly.

We and any of our third-party manufacturers or suppliers and current or potential future collaborators will use biological materials, potent chemical agents and may use hazardous materials, including chemicals and biological agents and compounds that could be dangerous to human health and safety of the environment. Our operations and the operations of our third-party manufacturers and suppliers also produce hazardous waste products. Federal, state and local laws and regulations govern the use, generation, manufacture, storage, handling and disposal of these materials and wastes. Compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations may be expensive, and current or future environmental laws and regulations may impair our product development efforts. In addition, we cannot eliminate the risk of accidental injury or contamination from these materials or wastes. We do not carry specific biological or hazardous waste insurance coverage, and our property, casualty and general liability insurance policies specifically exclude coverage for damages and fines arising from biological or hazardous waste exposure or contamination. In the event of contamination or injury, we could be held liable for damages or be penalized with fines in an amount exceeding our resources, and our clinical trials or regulatory approvals could be suspended.

Although we maintain workers’ compensation insurance for certain costs and expenses we may incur due to injuries to our employees resulting from the use of hazardous materials or other work-related injuries, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities. We do not maintain insurance for toxic tort claims that may be asserted against us in connection with our storage or disposal of biologic, hazardous or radioactive materials.

In addition, we may incur substantial costs in order to comply with current or future environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, which have tended to become more stringent over time. These current or future laws and regulations may impair our research, development or production efforts. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations also may result in substantial fines, penalties or other sanctions or liabilities, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Our internal computer systems, or those of any of our CROs, manufacturers, other contractors or consultants or current or potential future collaborators, may fail or suffer security breaches, which could result in a material disruption of our product development programs.

The United States federal and various state and foreign governments have adopted or proposed requirements regarding the collection, distribution, use, security, and storage of personally identifiable information and other data relating to individuals, and federal and state consumer protection laws are being applied to enforce regulations related to the collection, use, and dissemination of such data. In the ordinary course of business, we collect, store, transmit and otherwise process large amounts of data including, without limitation, proprietary business information and personal information. Despite the implementation of security measures, our internal technology systems (including infrastructure) and those of our current and any future CROs and other contractors, consultants and collaborators are vulnerable to damage from

98

computer viruses, cybersecurity threats (such as denial-of-service attacks, cyber-attacks or cyber-intrusions over the Internet, hacking, phishing and other social engineering attacks), unauthorized access or use, natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures. Attacks upon information technology systems are increasing in their frequency, levels of persistence, sophistication and intensity, and are being conducted by sophisticated and organized groups and individuals with a wide range of motives and expertise. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, we may also face increased cybersecurity risks due to our reliance on internet technology and the number of our employees who are working remotely, which may create additional opportunities for cybercriminals to exploit vulnerabilities. Furthermore, because the techniques used to obtain unauthorized access to, or to sabotage, systems change frequently and often are not recognized until launched against a target, we may be unable to anticipate these techniques or implement adequate preventative measures. We may also experience security breaches that may remain undetected for an extended period. If such an event were to occur and cause interruptions in our operations or result in the unauthorized disclosure of or access to personally identifiable information or individually identifiable health information (violating certain privacy laws such as GDPR), it could result in a material disruption of our development programs and our business operations, whether due to a loss of our trade secrets or other similar disruptions. Some of the federal, state and foreign government requirements include obligations of companies to notify individuals of security breaches involving particular personally identifiable information, which could result from breaches experienced by us or by our vendors, contractors, or organizations with which we have formed strategic relationships.

Any security breach or other incident, whether real or perceived, could impact our reputation, cause us to incur significant costs, including legal expenses, harm customer confidence, hurt our expansion into new markets, cause us to incur remediation costs, or cause us to lose existing customers. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from clinical trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. We also rely on third parties to manufacture our product candidates, and similar events relating to their computer systems could also have a material adverse effect on our business. To the extent that any real or perceived disruption or security breach affects our systems (or those of our third-party collaborators, service providers, contractors or consultants) or were to result in a loss of or accidental, unlawful or unauthorized access to, use of, release of, or other processing of personally identifiable information, or damage to, our data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability, the further development and commercialization of our product candidates could be delayed, and we could be subject to significant fines, penalties or liabilities for any noncompliance to certain privacy and security laws. For further discussion on the potential liability related to the violation of these laws, see “Risk Factors—We, our collaborators and our service providers may be subject to a variety of privacy and data security laws and contractual obligations, which could increase compliance costs and our failure to comply with them could subject us to potentially significant fines or penalties and otherwise harm our business.”

Business disruptions could seriously harm our future revenue and financial condition and increase our costs and expenses.

Our operations could be subject to earthquakes, power shortages, telecommunications failures, water shortages, floods, hurricanes, typhoons, fires, extreme weather conditions, medical epidemics and other natural or manmade disasters or business interruptions, for which we are predominantly self-insured.

We rely on third-party manufacturers to produce our product candidates. Our ability to obtain clinical supplies of our product candidates could be disrupted if the operations of these suppliers were affected by a man-made or natural disaster or other business interruption. In addition, our corporate headquarters is located in San Diego, California near major earthquake faults and fire zones, and the ultimate impact on us of being located near major earthquake faults and fire zones and being consolidated in a certain geographical area is unknown. The occurrence of any of these business disruptions could seriously harm our operations and financial condition and increase our costs and expenses.

We are subject to U.S. and certain foreign export and import controls, sanctions, embargoes, anti-corruption laws and anti-money laundering laws and regulations. Compliance with these legal

99

standards could impair our ability to compete in domestic and international markets. We could face criminal liability and other serious consequences for violations, which could harm our business.

We are subject to export control and import laws and regulations, including the U.S. Export Administration Regulations, U.S. Customs regulations, and various economic and trade sanctions regulations administered by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Controls and anti-corruption and anti-money laundering laws and regulations, including the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, as amended, the U.S. domestic bribery statute contained in 18 U.S.C. § 201, the U.S. Travel Act, the USA PATRIOT Act and other state and national anti-bribery and anti-money laundering laws in the countries in which we conduct activities. Anti-corruption laws are interpreted broadly and prohibit companies and their employees, agents, CROs, contractors and other collaborators and partners from authorizing, promising, offering, providing, soliciting or receiving, directly or indirectly, improper payments or anything else of value to recipients in the public or private sector. We may engage third parties for clinical trials outside of the United States, to sell our products abroad once we enter a commercialization phase, and/or to obtain necessary permits, licenses, patent registrations and other regulatory approvals. We have direct or indirect interactions with officials and employees of government agencies or government-affiliated hospitals, universities and other organizations. We can be held liable for the corrupt or other illegal activities of our employees, agents, CROs, contractors and other collaborators and partners, even if we do not explicitly authorize or have actual knowledge of such activities. Any violations of the laws and regulations described above may result in substantial civil and criminal fines and penalties, imprisonment, the loss of export or import privileges, debarment, tax reassessments, breach of contract and fraud litigation, reputational harm and other consequences.

Unstable market and economic conditions may have serious adverse consequences on our business, financial condition and stock price.

The global credit and financial markets have recently experienced extreme volatility and disruptions, including severely diminished liquidity and credit availability, declines in consumer confidence, declines in economic growth, increases in unemployment rates and uncertainty about economic stability. There can be no assurance that further deterioration in credit and financial markets and confidence in economic conditions will not occur. Our general business strategy may be adversely affected by any such economic downturn, volatile business environment or continued unpredictable and unstable market conditions. If the current equity and credit markets deteriorate, it may make any necessary debt or equity financing more difficult, more costly and more dilutive. Failure to secure any necessary financing in a timely manner and on favorable terms could have a material adverse effect on our growth strategy, financial performance and stock price and could require us to delay or abandon clinical development plans. In addition, there is a risk that one or more of our current service providers, manufacturers and other partners may not survive an economic downturn, which could directly affect our ability to attain our operating goals on schedule and on budget.

Changes in tax laws, including as a result of the 2020 United States presidential and congressional elections, may impact our future financial position and results of operations.

New income, sales, use or other tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be enacted at any time, or interpreted, changed, modified or applied adversely to us, any of which could adversely affect our business operations and financial performance. In particular, the recent presidential and congressional elections in the United States could result in significant changes in, and uncertainty with respect to, tax legislation, regulation and government policy directly affecting our business or indirectly affecting us because of impacts on our customers and suppliers. For example, the United States government may enact significant changes to the taxation of business entities including, among others, a permanent increase in the corporate income tax rate, an increase in the tax rate applicable to the global intangible low-taxed income and elimination of certain exemptions, and the imposition of minimum taxes or surtaxes on certain types of income. No specific United States tax legislation has been proposed at this time and the likelihood of these changes being enacted or implemented is unclear. We are currently unable to predict whether such changes will occur and, if so, the ultimate impact on our business. To the extent that such changes have a negative impact on us, our customers or our suppliers, including as a result of

100

related uncertainty, these changes may materially and adversely impact our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

We incur significant costs as a result of operating as a public company, and our management is required to devote substantial time to new compliance initiatives.

As a public company, we incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, which require, among other things, that we file with the SEC annual, quarterly and current reports with respect to our business and financial condition. In addition, Sarbanes-Oxley, as well as rules subsequently adopted by the SEC and Nasdaq to implement provisions of Sarbanes-Oxley, impose significant requirements on public companies, including requiring establishment and maintenance of effective disclosure and financial controls and changes in corporate governance practices. Further, pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, the SEC has adopted additional rules and regulations in these areas, such as mandatory “say on pay” voting requirements that will apply to us when we cease to be an emerging growth company. Stockholder activism, the current political environment and the current high level of government intervention and regulatory reform may lead to substantial new regulations and disclosure obligations, which may lead to additional compliance costs and impact the manner in which we operate our business in ways we cannot currently anticipate.

We expect the rules and regulations applicable to public companies to substantially increase our legal and financial compliance costs and to make some activities more time consuming and costly. If these requirements divert the attention of our management and personnel from other business concerns, they could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. The increased costs will decrease our net income or increase our net loss and may require us to reduce costs in other areas of our business. For example, we expect these rules and regulations to make it more difficult and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, and we may be required to incur substantial costs to maintain the same or similar coverage. We cannot predict or estimate the amount or timing of additional costs we may incur to respond to these requirements. The impact of these requirements could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors, our board committees or as executive officers.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or reports or publish unfavorable research or reports about our business, our stock price and trading volume could decline.

The trading market for our common stock depends in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us, our business, our market or our competitors. If no securities or industry analysts commence or continue coverage of our company, the trading price for our stock would be negatively impacted. In the event we obtain securities or industry analyst coverage, if one or more of the analysts who covers us downgrades our stock, our stock price would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts ceases to cover us or fails to regularly publish reports on us, interest in our stock could decrease, which could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline.

If we fail to maintain proper and effective internal control over financial reporting, our ability to produce accurate and timely financial statements could be impaired, investors may lose confidence in our financial reporting and the trading price of our common stock may decline.

Pursuant to Section 404 of Sarbanes-Oxley, our management will be required to report upon the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting beginning with the annual report for our fiscal year ending December 31, 2021. When we lose our status as an “emerging growth company” and reach an accelerated filer threshold, our independent registered public accounting firm will be required to attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. The rules governing the standards that must be met for our management to assess our internal control over financial reporting are complex and require significant documentation, testing and possible remediation. To comply with the requirements of being a reporting company under the Exchange Act, we are in the process of upgrading our information technology systems; implementing additional financial and management controls, reporting systems and

101

procedures; and hiring additional accounting and finance staff. If we or, if required, our auditors are unable to conclude that our internal control over financial reporting is effective, investors may lose confidence in our financial reporting and the trading price of our common stock may decline.

We cannot assure you that there will not be material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in our internal control over financial reporting in the future. Any failure to maintain internal control over financial reporting could severely inhibit our ability to accurately report our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. If we are unable to conclude that our internal control over financial reporting is effective, or if our independent registered public accounting firm determines we have a material weakness or significant deficiency in our internal control over financial reporting once that firm begin its Section 404 reviews, investors may lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, the market price of our common stock could decline, and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by Nasdaq, the SEC or other regulatory authorities. Failure to remedy any material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting, or to implement or maintain other effective control systems required of public companies, could also restrict our future access to the capital markets.

We could be subject to securities class action litigation.

In the past, securities class action litigation has often been brought against a company following a decline in the market price of its securities. This risk is especially relevant for us, because biotechnology and biopharmaceutical companies have experienced significant stock price volatility in recent years. If we face such litigation, it could result in substantial costs and a diversion of our management’s attention and resources, which could harm our business.

ITEM 1B.    Unresolved Staff Comments

None.

ITEM 2.    Properties

We currently lease approximately 14,310 square feet of office and laboratory space in San Diego, California, under leases that expire in 2021. In June 2020, and as amended in December 2020, we entered into a new lease for approximately 47,737 square feet of office and laboratory space to replace our current space. We expect to occupy the new space in November 2021, and our current leases will terminate 15 days after the commencement of the new lease. We believe that our facilities are adequate to meet our current needs and that suitable additional alternative spaces will be available in the future on commercially reasonable terms, if required.

For additional information, see Note 9, included in Item 15 of this annual report on Form 10-K.

102

ITEM 3.    Legal Proceedings

We are not currently subject to any material legal proceedings. From time to time, we may be involved in legal proceedings or subject to claims incident to the ordinary course of business. Regardless of the outcome, such proceedings or claims can have an adverse impact on us because of defense and settlement costs, diversion of resources and other factors, and there can be no assurances that favorable outcomes will be obtained.

ITEM 4.    Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.

103

PART II

ITEM 5.    Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

Market Information

Our common stock has been publicly traded on the Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol “RNA” since our initial public offering on June 12, 2020, which was completed at a price to the public of $18.00 per share. Prior to our initial public offering, there was no public market for our common stock.

Holders of Common Stock

As of February 26, 2021, there were 37,584,600 shares of our common stock outstanding held by approximately 65 holders of record of our common stock. This number was derived from our shareholder records and does not include beneficial owners of our common stock whose shares are held in the name of various dealers, clearing agencies, banks, brokers and other fiduciaries.

Dividend Policy

We have never declared or paid any cash dividends on our capital stock. We intend to retain future earnings, if any, to finance the operation of our business and do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. Any future determination related to dividend policy will be made at the discretion of our board of directors after considering our financial condition, results of operations, capital requirements, business prospects and other factors the board of directors deems relevant, and subject to the restrictions contained in any future financing instruments.

Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans

See Item 12 of Part III of this annual report on Form 10-K for information about our equity compensation plans which is incorporated by reference herein.

Performance Graph

The following stock performance graph illustrates a comparison from June 12, 2020 (the date our common stock commenced trading on the Nasdaq Global Market) through December 31, 2020, of the total cumulative stockholder return on our common stock, the Nasdaq Composite Index and the Nasdaq Biotechnology Index. The graph assumes an initial investment of $100 on June 12, 2020 at the opening trading price of $18.00 per share, and that all dividends were reinvested, although dividends have not been declared on our common stock. The comparisons in the graph are required by the SEC and are not intended to forecast or be indicative of possible future performance of our common stock.

104

Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities

From January 1, 2020 through December 31, 2020, we issued and sold the equity securities described below.

The securities described in paragraph (1) above were issued to investors in reliance upon the exemption from the registration requirements of the Securities Act, as set forth in Section 4(a)(2) under the Securities Act and Regulation D promulgated thereunder relative to transactions by an issuer not involving any public offering, to the extent an exemption from such registration was required. All holders of securities described above represented to us in connection with their purchase or issuance that they were accredited investors and were acquiring the securities for their own account for investment purposes only and not with a view to, or for sale in connection with, any distribution thereof and that they could bear the risks of the investment and could hold the securities for an indefinite period of time. The holders received written disclosures that the securities had not been registered under the Securities Act and that any resale must be made pursuant to a registration statement or an available exemption from such registration.

The stock options and the common stock issuable upon the exercise of such options as described in paragraph (2) above were issued pursuant to written compensatory plans or arrangements with our employees and directors, in reliance on the exemption from the registration requirements of the Securities Act provided by Rule 701 promulgated under the Securities Act or the exemption set forth in Section 4(a)(2) under the Securities Act and Regulation D promulgated thereunder relative to transactions by an issuer not involving any public offering. All recipients either received adequate information about us or had access, through employment or other relationships, to such information.

All of the foregoing securities are deemed restricted securities for purposes of the Securities Act. All of the foregoing securities included appropriate legends setting forth that the securities had not been registered and the applicable restrictions on transfer. No underwriters were involved in the foregoing sales of securities.

105

Use of Proceeds

On June 11, 2020, the SEC declared effective our registration statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-238612), as amended, filed in connection with our IPO. Our IPO closed on June 16, 2020, and we issued and sold 16,560,000 shares of our common stock at a price to the public of $18.00 per share, which included the exercise in full of the underwriters’ option to purchase additional shares. We received gross proceeds from our IPO of $298.1 million, before deducting underwriting discounts, commissions and offering costs of $24.0 million. The managing underwriters of the offering were Cowen and Company, LLC, SVB Leerink LLC, Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC and Wells Fargo Securities, LLC. No offering costs were paid or are payable, directly or indirectly, to our directors or officers, to persons owning 10% or more of any class of our equity securities or to any of our affiliates.

As of December 31, 2020, we have not used any of the proceeds from our IPO. There has been no material change in our planned use of such proceeds from that described in the prospectus for our IPO dated June 11, 2020.

Issuer Repurchases of Equity Securities

None.

106

ITEM 6.    Selected Financial Data

The following tables set forth our selected financial data as of, and for the periods ended on, the dates indicated. We have derived the statement of operations data from our audited financial statements included elsewhere in this annual report. You should read this data together with our financial statements and related notes and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included elsewhere in this annual report. Our historical results for any prior period are not indicative of our future results.

107

ITEM 7.    Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

You should read the following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations together with our financial statements and related notes thereto included elsewhere in this annual report. This discussion and analysis contains forward-looking statements based upon our current beliefs, plans and expectations that involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Our actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, including those set forth under “Risk Factors” or in other parts of this annual report.

Overview

We are pioneering a new class of oligonucleotide-based therapies called Antibody Oligonucleotide Conjugates, or AOCs, designed to overcome the current limitations of oligonucleotide therapies in order to treat a wide range of serious diseases. We utilize our proprietary AOC platform to design, engineer and develop therapeutics that combine the tissue selectivity of monoclonal antibodies and the precision of oligonucleotide therapies in order to access previously undruggable tissue and cell types and more effectively target underlying genetic drivers of diseases. We are initially focused on muscle diseases to demonstrate the capabilities of our AOCs, and our muscle franchise consists of five programs. Our lead product candidate, AOC 1001, is designed to treat myotonic dystrophy type 1, a rare monogenic muscle disease. We plan to initiate a Phase 1/2 clinical trial of AOC 1001 in the second half of 2021. We also intend to advance AOC product candidates in our four other muscle programs focused on the treatment of facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy, Duchenne muscular dystrophy, muscle atrophy and Pompe disease. In addition to our muscle franchise, we have development efforts focused on immune, cardiac and other cell types.

Since our inception in 2012, we have devoted substantially all of our resources to organizing and staffing our company, business planning, raising capital, developing our proprietary AOC platform, identifying potential product candidates, establishing our intellectual property portfolio and conducting research and preclinical studies, and providing other general and administrative support for these operations. We have not generated any revenue from product sales. In June 2020, we completed our initial public offering, or IPO, of 16,560,000 shares of our common stock at a price to the public of $18.00 per share, including the exercise in full by the underwriters of their option to purchase 2,160,000 additional shares of our common stock. Including the option exercise, our aggregate net proceeds from the offering were $274.1 million, net of underwriting discounts, commissions and offering costs. Since our inception through December 31, 2020, other sources of capital raised to fund our operations were comprised of aggregate gross proceeds of $131.6 million from the sale and issuance of convertible preferred stock/units and convertible notes, $30.1 million from funding under collaboration and research services agreements, and $7.0 million from loans from Silicon Valley Bank, or SVB, under a Loan and Security Agreement, as amended, or the LSA. As of December 31, 2020, we had cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities of $328.1 million.

We have incurred operating losses in each year since inception. Our net losses were $44.4 million, $24.7 million and $11.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, respectively. As of December 31, 2020, we had an accumulated deficit of $66.5 million. We expect our expenses and operating losses will increase substantially as we conduct our ongoing and planned preclinical studies and clinical trials, continue our research and development activities, utilize third parties to manufacture our product candidates and related raw materials, hire additional personnel, protect our intellectual property and incur additional costs associated with being a public company, including audit, legal, regulatory, and tax-related services associated with maintaining compliance with exchange listing and SEC requirements, director and officer insurance premiums, and investor relations costs. Our net losses may fluctuate significantly from quarter-to-quarter and year-to-year, depending on the timing of our preclinical studies and clinical trials and our expenditures on other research and development activities, as well as the generation of any collaboration and services revenue.

Based upon our current operating plans, we believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities will be sufficient to fund our operations for at least 12 months from the date of the

108

filing of this Form 10-K. While we may generate revenue under our current and/or future collaboration agreements, we do not expect to generate any revenues from product sales until we successfully complete development and obtain regulatory approval for one or more of our product candidates, which we expect will take a number of years and may never occur. If we obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to product sales, marketing, manufacturing and distribution. Accordingly, until such time as we can generate significant revenue from sales of our product candidates, if ever, we expect to finance our cash needs through equity offerings, debt financings or other capital sources, including potential collaborations, licenses and other similar arrangements. However, we may be unable to raise additional funds or enter into such other arrangements when needed, on favorable terms or at all. Our failure to raise capital or enter into such other arrangements when needed would have a negative impact on our financial condition and could force us to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development or future commercialization efforts or grant rights to develop and market product candidates that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves.

Agreement and Plan of Conversion

In April 2019, we entered into an Agreement and Plan of Conversion, pursuant to which we converted from Avidity Biosciences LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, or Avidity LLC, into Avidity Biosciences, Inc., a Delaware corporation. All of the membership interests of Avidity LLC were converted into securities of Avidity Biosciences, Inc., as follows: (i) each outstanding common unit of Avidity LLC converted into one share of Avidity Biosciences, Inc.’s common stock; (ii) each outstanding Series A convertible preferred unit of Avidity LLC converted into one share of Avidity Biosciences, Inc.’s Series A convertible preferred stock; and (iii) each outstanding Series B convertible preferred unit of Avidity LLC converted into one share of Avidity Biosciences, Inc.’s Series B convertible preferred stock. Outstanding convertible notes, warrants and stock awards under Avidity LLC’s employee benefit and incentive compensation plans continued on the same terms and conditions and became binding upon Avidity Biosciences, Inc.

Research Collaboration and License Agreement with Eli Lilly and Company

In April 2019, we entered into a Research Collaboration and License Agreement, or the Lilly Agreement, with Eli Lilly and Company, or Lilly, for the discovery, development and commercialization of AOC products in immunology and other select indications on a worldwide basis. Under the Lilly Agreement, we and Lilly will collaborate on preclinical research and discovery activities for such products, with Lilly being responsible for funding the cost of such activities by both parties. Lilly will also lead the clinical development, regulatory approval and commercialization of all such products, at its sole cost. We granted Lilly an exclusive, worldwide, royalty-bearing license, with the right to sublicense, under our technology to research, develop, manufacture, and sell products containing AOCs that are directed to up to six mRNA targets. We retain the right to use our technology to perform our obligations under the agreement and for all purposes not granted to Lilly. Lilly paid us an upfront license fee of $20.0 million in 2019, and we are eligible to receive up to $60.0 million in development milestone payments, up to $140.0 million in regulatory milestone payments and up to $205.0 million in commercialization milestone payments per target. We are eligible to receive a tiered royalty ranging from the mid-single to low-double digits from Lilly on worldwide annual net sales of licensed products, subject to specified and capped reductions for the market entry of biosimilar products, loss of patent coverage of licensed products and for payments owed to third parties for additional rights necessary to commercialize licensed products in the territory.

Concurrently with the Lilly Agreement, we issued a convertible promissory note to Lilly, or the Lilly Note, and received cash proceeds of $15.0 million in 2019. The Lilly Note accrued simple interest of 8.0% per annum and, if not converted, would have matured in October 2020. In connection with the sale of our Series C convertible preferred stock in November 2019, all outstanding principal and interest accrued under the Lilly Note converted into 4,576,342 shares of our Series C convertible preferred stock, at a conversion price equal to 80% of the per share cash price paid by the investors in the Series C convertible preferred stock financing.

109

Components of Results of Operations

Revenue

Our revenue to date has been derived from payments received under the Lilly Agreement and payments for research services under other research services agreements. Our services under these other research services agreements were substantially completed in early 2018, and therefore no related revenue was recognized beyond 2018 or is expected in future periods. For the foreseeable future, we may generate revenue from reimbursements of services under the Lilly Agreement, as well as a combination of upfront payments and milestone payments under our current and/or future collaboration agreements. We do not expect to generate any revenue from the sale of products unless and until such time that our product candidates have advanced through clinical development and regulatory approval, if ever. We expect that any revenue we generate, if at all, will fluctuate from quarter-to-quarter as a result of the timing and amount of payments relating to such services and milestones and the extent to which any of our products are approved and successfully commercialized. If we fail to complete preclinical and clinical development of product candidates or obtain regulatory approval for them, our ability to generate future revenues and our results of operations and financial position would be adversely affected.

Operating Expenses

Research and Development

Research and development expenses consist of external and internal costs associated with our research and development activities, including our discovery and research efforts, and the preclinical and clinical development of our product candidates. Our research and development expenses include:

Research and development costs, including costs reimbursed under the Lilly Agreement, are expensed as incurred, with reimbursements of such amounts being recognized as revenue. We account for nonrefundable advance payments for goods and services that will be used in future research and development activities as expenses when the service has been performed or when the goods have been received.

At any one time, we are working on multiple programs. Our internal resources, employees and infrastructure are not directly tied to any one research or drug discovery program and are typically deployed

110

across multiple programs. As such, we do not track internal costs on a specific program basis. The following table summarizes our external costs and internal costs for the periods presented (in thousands):

We expect our research and development expenses to increase for the foreseeable future as we continue to conduct our ongoing research and development activities, advance our preclinical research programs toward clinical development, including conducting IND-enabling studies, and conduct clinical trials. The process of conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials necessary to obtain regulatory approval is costly and time consuming. We may never succeed in achieving marketing approval for any of our product candidates.

The timelines and costs associated with research and development activities are uncertain, can vary significantly for each product candidate and development program, and are difficult to predict. We anticipate we will make determinations as to which programs to pursue and how much funding to direct to each program on an ongoing basis in response to preclinical and clinical results, regulatory developments, ongoing assessments as to each program’s commercial potential, and our ability to maintain or enter into new collaborations, to the extent we determine the resources or expertise of a collaborator would be beneficial for a given program. We will need to raise substantial additional capital in the future. In addition, we cannot forecast which development programs may be subject to future collaborations, when such arrangements will be secured, if at all, and to what degree such arrangements would affect our development plans and capital requirements.

Our development costs may vary significantly based on factors such as:

111

General and Administrative

General and administrative expenses consist primarily of employee-related expenses, including salaries, benefits and stock-based compensation, for employees in our executive, finance, accounting, legal, business development and support functions. Other general and administrative expenses include allocated facility, information technology and depreciation related costs not otherwise included in research and development expenses and professional fees for auditing, tax, intellectual property and legal services. Costs related to filing and pursuing patent applications are recognized as general and administrative expenses as incurred since recoverability of such expenditures is uncertain.

We expect our general and administrative expenses will increase for the foreseeable future to support our increased research and development activities and increased costs of operating as a public company. These increased costs will likely include increased expenses related to audit, legal, regulatory and tax services associated with maintaining compliance with exchange listing and SEC requirements, director and officer insurance premiums and investor relations costs associated with operating as a public company.

Other Income (Expense)

Interest Income

Interest income consists primarily of interest earned on our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities.

Interest Expense

Interest expense consists of cash and noncash interest expense associated with our previously outstanding financing arrangements, which included borrowings under the LSA and convertible notes with certain of our investors.

Change in Fair Value of Preferred Warrant Liability

Prior to our IPO, we classified our outstanding warrant to purchase shares of our Series A convertible preferred stock as a liability on our balance sheets at its estimated fair value since the underlying convertible preferred stock was classified as temporary equity. At the end of each reporting period, changes in the estimated fair value during the period were recorded as a component of other income (expense). In connection with our IPO, this warrant was adjusted to become a warrant to purchase shares of our common stock and met the criteria to be classified within stockholders’ equity; therefore, the warrant was no longer subject to liability accounting. Accordingly, the fair value of the warrant liability was reclassified to stockholders’ equity.

Results of Operations

Comparison of the Years Ended December 31, 2020 and 2019

The following table summarizes our results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019 (in thousands):

112

Revenue

Revenue was $6.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, compared to $2.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. Revenue during both periods was derived from the Lilly Agreement, which was entered into in April 2019. The increase was due to higher reimbursable collaboration-related research and development expenses resulting in the recognition of higher corresponding revenue under the Lilly Agreement.

Research and Development Expenses

Research and development expenses were $37.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, compared to $14.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. The increase was primarily driven by higher external and internal research and development costs related to the advancement of AOC 1001 and our other programs, as well as costs related to the expansion of our overall research capabilities. In 2020, external research and development costs were $22.9 million, compared to $6.6 million in 2019. The increase was primarily due to higher research and preclinical activities, including manufacturing activities. Research and development related internal costs were $14.7 million in 2020, compared to $7.9 million in 2019. The increase was primarily due to higher employee salaries and benefits of $2.9 million, noncash stock compensation of $1.8 million, lab supplies of $1.1 million and facilities of $0.5 million.

General and Administrative Expenses

General and administrative expenses were $13.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, compared to $5.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. The increase was primarily due to higher costs related to being a public company, including higher salaries and benefits of $2.1 million, noncash stock-based compensation of $2.1 million, professional fees of $1.8 million and insurance costs of $1.0 million, as well as higher patent filing fees of $0.8 million.

Other Income (Expense)

Other expense was $0.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, compared to $7.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2019. The change was primarily related to reduced interest expense as a result of the November 2019 conversion of all outstanding convertible notes into convertible preferred stock, which was subsequently converted into common stock in connection with our IPO.

Comparison of the Years Ended December 31, 2019 and 2018

The following table summarizes our results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018 (in thousands):

Revenue

Revenue was $2.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to $0.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. Revenue during the year ended December 31, 2019 was derived from the Lilly Agreement, which was entered into in April 2019. Revenue during the year ended December 31, 2018 was derived from the performance of research and development activities pursuant to agreements with other parties, which were substantially completed in early 2018.

113

Research and Development Expenses

Research and development expenses were $14.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to $8.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. The increase was primarily driven by higher external and internal research and development costs related to the advancement of AOC 1001 and our other programs. In 2019, external research and development costs were $6.6 million, compared to $1.4 million in 2018. The increase was primarily due to higher research and preclinical activities, including manufacturing activities. Research and development related internal costs were $7.9 million in 2019, compared to $7.0 million in 2018. The increase was primarily due to higher employee salaries and benefits of $1.4 million, partially offset by lower lab supplies of $0.6 million.

General and Administrative Expenses

General and administrative expenses were $5.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to $2.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. The increase was primarily due to higher salaries and benefits of $1.1 million, professional fees of $0.4 million, legal costs incurred in connection with the Lilly Agreement of $0.3 million, noncash stock-based compensation of $0.3 million and patent filing fees of $0.2 million.

Other Income (Expense)

Other expense was $7.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to $0.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2018. The increase was primarily related to interest expense incurred in 2019 in connection with our outstanding convertible notes issued to certain of our investors, including $5.7 million of noncash interest expense representing the accretion of debt premium and issuance costs, and additional interest in connection with the LSA.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Sources of Liquidity

In June 2020, we completed our IPO of 16,560,000 shares of our common stock at a price to the public of $18.00 per share, including the exercise in full by the underwriters of their option to purchase 2,160,000 additional shares of our common stock. Including the option exercise, our aggregate net proceeds from the offering were $274.1 million, net of underwriting discounts, commissions and offering costs. Since our inception through December 31, 2020, other sources of capital raised to fund our operations were comprised of aggregate gross proceeds of $131.6 million from the sale and issuance of convertible preferred stock/units and convertible notes, $30.1 million from funding under collaboration and research services agreements, and $7.0 million from loans from SVB under the LSA. As of December 31, 2020, we had cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities of $328.1 million.

Convertible Promissory Notes

In July 2018 and February 2019, we issued convertible promissory notes to certain of our existing investors, or the 2018 Notes and 2019 Notes, respectively, and received proceeds of $3.0 million and $4.5 million, respectively. The 2018 Notes and 2019 Notes accrued simple interest at a rate of 8% and 10% per annum, respectively, and had a maturity date in December 2020, subject to earlier conversion.

In addition, in April 2019, as described above, in connection with the Lilly Agreement, we issued the Lilly Note and received cash proceeds of $15.0 million.

In November 2019, in connection with our Series C financing transaction, all outstanding amounts of principal and accrued interest from the 2018 Notes, 2019 Notes and Lilly Note, which totaled $23.8 million, were converted into an aggregate of 6,893,036 shares of our Series C convertible preferred stock, which subsequently converted into shares of our common stock in connection with our IPO.

114

SVB Loan and Security Agreement

In June 2017, we entered into an amendment to the LSA with SVB, or the First LSA Amendment, which provided up to $7.0 million in available borrowings in two tranches. In 2017, we drew the first tranche of $5.0 million, of which $4.6 million was used to repay our existing debt obligations to SVB. In August 2018, we drew the second tranche of $2.0 million. Interest accrued on the unpaid principal balance at an adjustable annual rate of the prime rate per the Wall Street Journal plus 0.20%. In addition to our monthly payments of principal and interest, our repayment obligations included a final payment of 6.5% of the original principal advanced, which was due upon final maturity of the loan in June 2021. On June 30, 2020, we voluntarily prepaid the outstanding principal balance of $2.8 million and final payments and accrued interest of $0.5 million under the LSA, and the LSA was terminated.

In connection with execution of the LSA, we issued SVB a warrant to purchase 16,474 shares of our Series A convertible preferred stock at an exercise price of $2.2615 per share, exercisable at any time following issuance with a term of ten years. In connection with the completion of our IPO in June 2020, the preferred stock warrant was adjusted to become a warrant exercisable for 7,809 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $4.77 per share. In connection with the First LSA Amendment in June 2017, we issued SVB an additional warrant to purchase 9,442 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $0.53 per share, exercisable at any time following issuance with a term of seven years. On June 17, 2020, the warrants were cashless exercised for an aggregate of 15,833 shares of common stock.

Future Capital Requirements

As of December 31, 2020, we had cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities of $328.1 million. Based upon our current operating plans, we believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities will be sufficient to fund our operations for at least 12 months from the date of the filing of this Form 10-K. However, our forecast of the period of time through which our financial resources will be adequate to support our operations is a forward-looking statement that involves risks and uncertainties, and actual results could vary materially. We have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could deplete our capital resources sooner than we expect. Additionally, the process of conducting preclinical studies and testing product candidates in clinical trials is costly, and the timing of progress and expenses in these studies and trials is uncertain.

Our future capital requirements are difficult to forecast and will depend on many factors, including but not limited to:

115

While we may generate revenue under our current and/or future collaboration agreements, we do not expect to generate any revenues from product sales until we successfully complete development and obtain regulatory approval for one or more of our product candidates, which we expect will take a number of years and may never occur. If we obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to product sales, marketing, manufacturing and distribution. Accordingly, until such time as we can generate significant revenue from sales of our product candidates, if ever, we expect to finance our cash needs through equity offerings, debt financings or other capital sources, including current and potential future collaborations, licenses and other similar arrangements. However, we may be unable to raise additional funds or enter into such other arrangements when needed, on favorable terms or at all. In addition, we may seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans. Our failure to raise capital or enter into such other arrangements when needed would have a negative impact on our financial condition and could force us to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development or future commercialization efforts or grant rights to develop and market product candidates that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves.

Cash Flows

The following table summarizes our cash flows for the periods presented (in thousands):

Operating Activities

Net cash used in operating activities was $37.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, which consisted primarily of cash used to fund our operations related to the development of AOC 1001 and our other programs. Net cash provided by operating activities was $2.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, which consisted primarily of the $20.0 million upfront fee related to the Lilly Agreement, partially offset by cash used to fund our operations related to the development of AOC 1001 and our other programs. Net cash used in operating activities was $9.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2018, which consisted primarily of cash used to fund our operations related to the development of AOC 1001 and our other programs.

Investing Activities

Net cash used in investing activities was $7.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, which consisted primarily of cash used to purchase marketable securities and property and equipment. Net cash used in investing activities was $0.2 million and $49,000 for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively, which consisted primarily of cash used to purchase property and equipment.

116

Financing Activities

Net cash provided by financing activities was $272.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2020, which consisted primarily of net proceeds from our IPO and net proceeds from the issuance of Series C convertible preferred stock, partially offset by payments related to the LSA. Net cash provided by financing activities was $89.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, which consisted primarily of net proceeds from the issuance of Series C convertible preferred stock and the issuance of convertible notes, partially offset by payments related to the LSA. Net cash provided by financing activities was $5.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2018, which consisted primarily of net proceeds from the issuance of convertible notes and a loan draw under the LSA.

Contractual Obligations and Commitments

The following table summarizes our contractual obligations and commitments at December 31, 2020 (in thousands):