Evaxion Biotech A/S (EVAX) 20-F2021 FY Annual report (foreign)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

​

​

​

​

​

CERTAIN DEFINITIONS

Unless otherwise indicated and except where the context otherwise requires, references in this annual report on Form 20-F to:

​

​

PRESENTATION OF FINANCIAL INFORMATION

This annual report contains our audited consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2021 and 2020 and for the years ended December 31, 2021, 2020 and 2019 (our “audited consolidated financial statements”), prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”), as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board (“IASB”).

Our financial information is presented in our presentation currency, U.S. Dollar, or USD. Our parent Company’s functional currency is the Danish Krone, or DKK. Certain Danish Krone amounts in this annual report have been translated solely for convenience into USD at an assumed exchange rate of DKK 6.5612 per $1.00, which was the official exchange rate of such currencies as of December 31, 2021 rounded to four decimal places.

Foreign currency transactions are translated into our functional currency, DKK, using the exchange rates prevailing at the dates of the transactions. Foreign exchange gains and losses resulting from the settlement of such transactions and from the translation at year-end exchange rates of monetary assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies are recognized as financial income or financial expenses in the statements of comprehensive loss. Non-monetary items in foreign currency, which are measured at cost at the statements of financial position date are translated into our functional currency, DKK, using the exchange rates at the date of the transaction. Such DKK translated amounts are not necessarily indicative of the amounts of DKK that could have actually been purchased with the underlying currency being exchanged into DKK at the dates indicated.

Assets and liabilities in our functional currency are translated to our presentation currency, USD, at the exchange rate applicable on December 31, 2021. Income and expenses in our functional currency are translated to USD at the average exchange rate, which corresponds to an approximation of the exchange rates prevailing on each individual transaction date. Translation differences arising in the translation to presentation currency are recognized in other comprehensive income. Such USD amounts are not necessarily indicative of the amounts of USD that could actually have been purchased upon exchange of DKK at the dates indicated.

We have made rounding adjustments to some of the figures contained in this annual report. Accordingly, numerical figures shown as totals in some tables may not be exact arithmetic aggregations of the figures that preceded them.

​

TRADEMARKS, SERVICE MARKS AND TRADENAMES

This annual report includes trademarks, tradenames and service marks, certain of which belong to us and others 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 the absence of those references is not intended to indicate, in any way, that we will not assert our rights or that the applicable owner will not assert its rights to these trademarks and tradenames to the fullest extent under applicable law. We do not intend our use or display of other parties’ trademarks, trade names or service marks to imply, and such use or display should not be construed to imply, a relationship with, or endorsement or sponsorship of us by, these other parties.

​

SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This annual report contains forward-looking statements concerning our business, operations and financial performance and condition, as well as our plans, objectives and expectations for our business operations and financial performance and condition. Many of the forward-looking statements contained in this annual report can be identified by the use of forward-looking words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “might,” “plan,” “potential,” “should,” “target,” “would” and other similar expressions that are predictions of or indicate future events and future trends, although not all forward-looking statements contain these identifying words.

Forward-looking statements appear in a number of places in this annual report and include, but are not limited to, statements regarding intent, belief or current expectations. Forward-looking statements are based on the current beliefs and assumptions of the management of Evaxion and on information currently available to such management. While the management of Evaxion believes that these forward-looking statements are reasonable as and when made, there can be no assurance that future developments will be as anticipated. Such statements are subject to risks and uncertainties, and actual results may differ materially from those expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements due to of various factors, including, but not limited to, those identified under the section “Item 3. Key Information—D. Risk Factors” in this annual report. These risks and uncertainties include factors relating to:

Our actual results or performance could differ materially from those expressed in, or implied by, any forward-looking statements relating to those matters. Accordingly, no assurances can be given that any of the events anticipated by the forward-looking statements will transpire or occur, or if any of them do so, what impact they will have on our results of operations, cash flows or financial condition. Except as required by law, we are under no obligation, and expressly disclaim any obligation, to update, alter or otherwise revise any forward-looking statement, whether written or oral, that may be made from time to time, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

Summary of Material Risks Associated with Our Business

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

The summary risk factors described above should be read together with the text of the full risk factors below in the section entitled “Risk Factors” and the other information set forth in this Annual Report on Form 20-F, including our consolidated financial statements and the related notes, as well as in other documents that we file with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission. The risks summarized above or described in full below are not the only risks that we face. Additional risks and uncertainties not precisely known to us or that we currently deem to be immaterial may also materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and future growth prospects.

​

PART I

Item 1.Identity of Directors, Senior Management and Advisers

Not applicable.

​

Item 2.Offer Statistics and Expected Timetable

Not applicable.

​

Item 3.Key Information

3.A. Reserved

3.B. Capitalization and Indebtedness

Not applicable.

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

Not applicable.

3.D. Risk Factors

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company with no pharmaceutical products approved for commercial sale. Our business faces significant risks. You should carefully consider all of the information set forth in this annual report and in our other filings with the SEC, including the following risk factors which we face and which are faced by our industry. Our business, financial condition or results of operations could be materially adversely affected by any of these risks. This annual report also contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Our results could materially differ from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements, as a result of certain factors including the risks described below and elsewhere in this report and our other SEC filings. See “Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” above.

Risks Related to our Financial Condition and Capital Requirements

We have incurred significant losses since our inception and we anticipate that we will continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future, which makes it difficult to assess our future viability. We have not generated significant revenue and may never be profitable.

We have incurred net losses in each year since our inception in 2008, including net losses of $24.5 million, $15.0 million, and $11.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2021, 2020, and 2019, respectively. As of December 31, 2021, we had accumulated deficit of $50.4 million.

We have devoted most of our financial resources to research and development, including our pre-clinical and clinical development activities and the development of our AI platform technologies, PIONEER, EDEN and RAVEN. To date, we have financed our operations primarily through the sale of equity securities, issuance of convertible debt instruments and through private and governmental grants. The amount of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of our future expenditures and our ability to obtain funding through equity or debt financings, sales of assets, collaborations and grants. We believe that the cost and expense of late stage clinical testing, regulatory and marketing approval and commercialization of products for such disease indications are beyond the resources of all but the large biopharmaceutical and pharmaceutical companies. Therefore, we intend to develop our product candidates through Phase 2b clinical trials and then enter into partnership arrangements with these large biopharmaceutical and pharmaceutical companies to conduct late stage clinical trials, regulatory and marketing approval and commercialization of our product candidates. We have not yet entered into any such partnership agreements and may be unable to do so on economically viable terms, if at all. As a result, late stage clinical trials as well as pivotal clinical trials for our product candidates have not been commenced and even if such trials are commenced in the near future, it will be several years, if ever, before we have a product candidate ready for commercialization by one of our partners. Even if our future partners obtain regulatory approval to market a

product candidate, our future revenues will depend upon the size of any markets in which our product candidates receive such approval, upfront, milestone and any other payments we receive from our future partners, and our future partners’ ability to achieve sufficient market acceptance, reimbursement from third-party payors, and adequate market share in those markets. We may never achieve profitability.

Our ability to generate revenue and achieve profitability depends on our ability to successfully complete the development of, and our partners’ ability to obtain the regulatory approvals necessary to commercialize, our product candidates. We do not anticipate generating substantial revenues in the near term from any of our commercialization partnerships we may establish.

We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and increasing operating losses for the foreseeable future. We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially as we:

Our ability to generate future revenues from our potential commercialization partnerships depends heavily on our success in:

Our operating results may fluctuate significantly, which makes our future operating results difficult to predict. If our operating results fall below expectations, the market price of the ADSs could decline.

Our financial condition and operating results have varied in the past and will continue to fluctuate from one financial period to the next due to a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control. Factors relating to our business that may contribute to these fluctuations include the following, as well as other factors described elsewhere in this Form 20-F:

Due to the various factors mentioned above, and others, the projected financial information included in this Form 20-F should not be relied upon as indications of our future operating performance.

The net losses we incur may fluctuate significantly from one reporting period to the next, such that a period-to-period comparison of our results of operations may not be a good indication of our future performance.

In any particular period, our operating results could be below the expectations of securities analysts or investors, which could cause the market price of the ADSs to decline. While as a general matter we intend to periodically report on the status of our product candidate pipeline, including articulating anticipated next steps in the form of development plans or potential data readouts, we may not always be able to provide forward-looking guidance on the timing of those next steps. In addition, we do not control the timing of disclosures of any milestones related to any of our product candidates that are managed by our partners. Any disclosure by a partner of data that are perceived as negative, whether or not such data are related to other data that we or others release, may have a material adverse impact on the market price of the ADSs or overall valuation. The market price of the ADSs may decline as a result of unexpected clinical trial results in one or more of our programs, including adverse safety events reported for any of our programs.

Our expenses could increase beyond our expectations if we are required by the FDA, the European Medicines Agency, or the EMA, the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration, or the TGA, or other regulatory agencies to perform clinical and other trials or make changes to our manufacturing or quality systems in addition to those that we currently anticipate. Even if we are able to generate revenues from our agreements with future partners, if any, we may not become profitable and may need to obtain additional funding to continue operations.

The amount of NOLs and research and development credits and our ability to use the same to offset future taxable income may be subject to certain limitations and uncertainty.

In Denmark, we have unused tax loss carryforwards for corporate taxes, though we have not recognized deferred tax assets related to such loss carryforwards for IFRS reporting purposes. In general, NOL carryforwards in Denmark do not expire. They are, however, subject to review and possible adjustment by the Danish tax authorities. Furthermore, under current Danish tax laws, certain substantial changes in our ownership structure and business may further limit the amount of NOL carryforwards that can be used annually to offset future taxable income. In addition, we may in the future have United States federal and state NOL carryforwards in the United States, and other jurisdictions where we maintain a subsidiary.

We may not be able to utilize a material portion of our NOLs or credits in either Denmark, the United States, or other jurisdictions where we maintain a subsidiary or otherwise engage in business. In addition, the rules regarding the timing of revenue and expense recognition for tax purposes in connection with various transactions are complex and uncertain in many respects, and our recognition could be subject to challenge by taxing authorities. In the event any such challenge is sustained, our NOLs could be materially reduced or we could be determined to be a material cash taxpayer for one or more years. Furthermore, our ability to use our NOLs or credits is conditioned upon our attaining profitability and generating taxable income. As described above, we have incurred significant net

losses since our inception and anticipate that we will continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future. We do not know whether or when we will generate the taxable income necessary to utilize our NOL or credit carryforwards.

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

As of December 31, 2021 we had $32.2 million in cash and cash equivalents. The net proceeds from our IPO completed in February 2021 was $25.3 million, based on the initial public offering price of $10.00 per ADS, after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses payable by us. The net proceeds from our follow-on offering completed in November 2021 was $24.9 million, based on the public offering price of $7.00 per ADS after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses payable by us.

In August 2020, we executed a loan agreement, or the EIB Loan Agreement, with the European Investment Bank, or EIB, for a principal amount of €20.0 million, divided into three tranches of tranche 1 in the amount of €7.0 million, tranche 2 in the amount of €6.0 million and tranche 3 in the amount of €7.0 million, or the EIB Loan. Under the EIB Loan Agreement, the EIB Loan tranche balances are due six years from their respective disbursement dates. In connection with disbursement of each tranche, EIB is entitled to receive certain warrants, or the EIB Warrants. In November 2020, we initiated the process to receive the funds from the disbursement of tranche 1 of the EIB Loan in the aggregate amount of €7.0 million but due to the timing of the IPO we did not finalize a disbursement offer. In connection therewith, EIB received 351,036 EIB Warrants, which vested immediately, pursuant to the terms of a separate warrant agreement, or the EIB Warrant Agreement. As of December 31, 2021, we initiated the draw down of the first tranche of the EIB loan Agreement amounting to €7.0 million. We received the proceeds from the draw down of the first tranche of the EIB loan of €7.0 million on February 17, 2022. We expect that the net proceeds from our IPO, our follow-on offering, the proceeds from draws on amounts available under the EIB Loan and our existing cash and cash equivalents will be sufficient to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements through at least 12 months from the date of this Form 20-F. However, our operating plan 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, government or other third-party funding, sales of assets, other collaborations and licensing arrangements, or a combination of these approaches. In any event, we will require additional capital to achieve our goals. Even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans, we may seek additional capital if market conditions are favorable or if we have specific strategic considerations. Our spending will vary based on new and ongoing development and corporate activities. Due to high uncertainty of the length of time and activities associated with discovery and development of our product candidates, we are unable to estimate the actual funds we will require for our development activities.

Our future funding requirements, both near and long term, will depend on many factors, including, without limitation:

To date, we have financed our operations primarily through the sale of equity securities, issuance of convertible debt instruments and from private and governmental grants and we cannot be certain that additional funding will be available on favorable terms, or at all. Until we can generate sufficient upfront fees, milestone payments and royalty revenues from our agreements with future partners, if any, to finance our operations, which we may never do, we expect to finance our future cash needs through a combination of public or private equity offerings, debt financings, sales of assets, licensing arrangements, and other product development arrangements. Any fundraising efforts may divert our management from their day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop our product candidates. In addition, we cannot guarantee that future financing will be available in sufficient amounts, at the right time, on favorable terms, or at all. Negative clinical trial data or setbacks, or perceived setbacks, in our programs or with respect to our technology could impair our ability to raise additional financing on favorable terms, or at all. Moreover, the terms of any financing may adversely affect the holdings or the rights of our shareholders, and the issuance of additional securities, whether equity or debt, by us, or the possibility of such issuance, may cause the market price of the ADSs to decline. If we raise additional funds through public or private equity offerings, the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that may adversely affect our securityholders’ rights.

Further, to the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of ADSs, ordinary shares or securities convertible or exchangeable into ordinary shares, our shareholders’ ownership interest will be diluted. In addition, we may enter into credit facilities from time to time, which may be secured, to fund certain of our operations. If we raise additional capital through debt financing, we would be subject to fixed payment obligations and may be subject to security interests in our assets and covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures or declaring dividends. If we raise additional capital through sales of assets or other collaborations, or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish certain valuable rights to our product candidates, technologies, future revenue streams or research programs. We also could be required to seek future partners for one or more of our current or future product candidates at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable or relinquish our rights to product candidates or intellectual property that we otherwise would seek to develop ourselves. If we are unable to raise additional capital in sufficient amounts, at the right time, on favorable terms, or at all, we may have to significantly delay, scale back or discontinue the development of one or more of our product candidates, or one or more of our other research and development initiatives. Any of the above events could significantly harm our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations, cause the market price of the ADSs to decline, and negatively impact our ability to fund operations

Any additional financing that we could seek may not be available on favorable terms or at all. For example, while the potential impact and duration of the COVID-19 pandemic on the global economy and our business in particular may be difficult to assess or predict, the pandemic has resulted in, and may continue to result in significant disruption of global financial markets, reducing our ability to access capital, which could in the future negatively affect our liquidity. If we are unable to obtain adequate financing or financing on terms satisfactory to us when we require it, our future plans and our ability to execute our strategy could be adversely affected, which in turn could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition and/or prospects.

We will need to develop and expand our company, and we may encounter difficulties in managing this development and expansion, which could disrupt our operations.

As of December 31, 2021, we had 61 full-time equivalent employees and, in connection with the growth and advancement of our pipeline and becoming a public company, we expect to increase the number of employees and the scope of our operations. To manage our anticipated development and expansion, we must continue to implement and improve our managerial, operational, legal, compliance and financial systems, expand our facilities, and continue to recruit and train additional qualified personnel. Also, our management may need to divert a disproportionate amount of its attention away from its day-to-day activities and devote a substantial amount of time to managing these development activities.

As a growing biotechnology company, we are actively pursuing drug classes, platforms and product candidates in many therapeutic areas and across a wide range of diseases. Successfully developing product candidates for and fully understanding the regulatory and manufacturing pathways to all of these therapeutic areas and disease states requires a significant depth of talent, resources and corporate processes in order to allow simultaneous execution across multiple areas. Due to our limited resources, we may not be able to effectively manage this simultaneous execution and the expansion of our operations or recruit and train additional qualified personnel. This may result in weaknesses in our infrastructure, give rise to operational mistakes, legal or regulatory compliance failures, loss of business opportunities, loss of employees and reduced productivity among remaining employees. The physical expansion of our operations may lead to significant costs and may divert financial resources from other projects, such as the development of our product candidates. If our management is unable to effectively manage our expected development and expansion, our expenses may increase more than expected, our ability to generate or increase our revenue could be reduced and we may not be able to implement our business strategy. Our future financial performance and our ability to compete effectively and develop our product candidate will depend in part on our ability to effectively manage the future development and expansion of our company.

Risk factors

We have identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting. If we are unable to remediate these material weaknesses, or if we experience additional material weaknesses in the future, we may not be able to accurately or timely report our financial condition or results of operations and investors may lose confidence in our financial reports and the market price of the ADSs could be adversely affected.

As a public company, we are required to maintain internal control over financial reporting and to report any material weaknesses in such internal control. Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires that we evaluate and determine the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting and provide a management report on internal control over financial reporting. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act also requires that our management report on internal control over financial reporting be attested to by our independent registered public accounting firm, to the extent we are no longer an “emerging growth company,” as defined by the JOBS Act. We do not expect to have our independent registered public accounting firm attest to our management report on internal control over financial reporting for so long as we are an emerging growth company.

As defined in the standards established by the U.S. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, a “material weakness” is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our company’s annual consolidated financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.

In connection with the preparation of our financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2021, we continued to be in the process of designing and implementing controls to monitor and provide oversight over the design and operating effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting in order to comply with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. We determined that management failed to implement certain components of the COSO framework, including elements of the control environment, information and communication, control activities and monitoring activities. Therefore, we have assessed that we lacked sufficient internal controls to support effective financial reporting as of December 31, 2021, which constitutes a material weakness.

To remediate this material weakness, we will continue to make further progress on the design and operating effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting, including the monitoring, oversight and evaluation of our internal controls. We will allocate more internal resources to internal controls and intend to engage external advisors to provide training and to reassess and redesign processes and develop new controls as appropriate including assisting with the evaluation and documentation of the risk assessment, design and operating effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting and assist with the remediation of any deficiencies.

Additionally, in the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, we had identified a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting, which remained unremediated as of December 31, 2021. The unremediated material weakness identified relates to the lack of accounting and supervisory personnel that possess an appropriate level of technical accounting experience and training, and their lack of supervision over third party service providers in areas such as books and records, financial controlling, and financial statements preparation.

To remediate this previously identified material weakness, we retained an advisory firm to provide additional depth and breadth to our technical accounting and financial reporting capabilities and are taking steps such as the hiring of additional finance staff. Also, during 2021, we hired four additional accounting personnel with financial statement closing experience and technical IFRS knowledge for the purposes of timely and reliable financial reporting in accordance with IFRS and the requirements set forth by the SEC. In addition, we recently announced that we have hired a new Chief Financial Officer who has considerable public company experience.

While we intend to implement our plans to remediate these material weaknesses, we cannot predict the success of such plans or if they will result in remediation of these material weaknesses or that additional material weaknesses will not be identified in the future. If we are unable to remediate these material weaknesses or if we experience additional material weaknesses in the future or otherwise continue to fail in maintaining an effective system of internal controls, we may not be able to accurately or timely report our financial condition or results of operations. Our investors may lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, the market price of the ADSs could be adversely affected, and we could become subject to investigations by the stock exchange on which our securities are listed, the SEC, or other regulatory authorities, which could require additional financial and management resources.

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

We do not carry insurance for all categories of risk that our business may encounter, and insurance coverage is becoming increasingly expensive. We do not know if we will be able to maintain existing insurance with adequate levels of coverage, and any liability insurance coverage we acquire in the future may not be sufficient to reimburse us for any expenses or losses we may suffer. If our future partners obtain marketing approval for any product candidates that we or our future partners may develop, we intend to acquire insurance coverage to include the sale of commercial products, but we may be unable to obtain such insurance on commercially reasonable terms or in adequate amounts, if at all. If our losses exceed our insurance coverage, our financial condition would be adversely affected. 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. Clinical trials or regulatory approvals for any of our product candidates could be suspended, which could adversely affect our results of operations and business, including by preventing or limiting the development and commercialization of any product candidates that we or our future partners may develop. We also expect that operating as a public company will make it more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, and we may be required to accept reduced policy limits and coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain the same or similar coverage. As a result, it may be more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified individuals to serve on our Board, our board committees or our management team.

Risks Related to our Business and Industry

Our AI approach to the discovery and development of product candidates is novel and unproven, and we do not know whether we or our partners, if any, will be able to develop any products of commercial value.

We are leveraging our PIONEER, EDEN and RAVEN AI platform technologies to create a pipeline of cancer immunotherapies and bacterial and viral infectious disease product candidates for patients whose diseases have not been adequately addressed to date by other approaches, and to design and conduct efficient clinical trials with a potentially greater likelihood of success. While we believe that applying our AI platform technologies to create medicines for defined patient populations may potentially enable drug research and clinical development that is more efficient than conventional drug research and development, our approach is both novel and unproven and, therefore, the cost and time needed to develop our product candidates is difficult to predict. Our efforts may not result in the discovery and development of commercially viable medicines. We may also be incorrect about the effects of our product candidates on the diseases of our targeted patient populations, which may limit the utility of our approach or the perception of the utility of our approach. Furthermore, our defined patient populations available for study and treatment may be lower than expected, which could adversely affect our ability to conduct clinical trials and may also adversely affect the size of any market for medicines we may successfully commercialize. Our approach may not result in clinical effect, time savings, higher success rates or reduced costs as we expect and, if not, we may not attract future partners or develop new drug candidates as quickly or cost effectively as expected and therefore our future partners may not be able to commercialize our approach as originally expected.

Our AI approach may fail to help us discover and develop additional product candidates.

Any drug discovery that we are conducting using our AI platform technologies may not be successful in identifying compounds that have commercial value or therapeutic utility. Our AI platform technologies may initially show promise in identifying potential product

candidates, yet fail to yield viable product candidates for clinical development or commercialization for a number of reasons, including:

We may experience challenges with the acquisition, development, enhancement or deployment of technology necessary for our AI platform technologies.

Our business requires sophisticated computer systems and software. Some of the technologies are changing rapidly and we must continue to adapt to these changes in a timely and effective manner at an acceptable cost. There can be no guarantee that we will be able to develop, acquire, enhance, deploy or integrate new technologies, that these new technologies will meet our needs or achieve our expected goals, or that we will be able to do so as quickly or cost-effectively as our competitors. Significant technological change could render our AI platform technologies obsolete. Our continued success will depend on our ability to adapt to changing technologies, manage and process ever-increasing amounts of data and information and improve the performance features of our AI platform technologies in response to an ever-changing patient population. We may experience difficulties that could delay or prevent the successful design, development, testing, and introduction of advanced versions of our AI platform technologies, limiting our ability to identify new product candidates. Any of these failures could have a material adverse effect on our operating results and financial condition.

Our product candidates may not work as intended, may cause undesirable side effects or may have other properties that could delay or prevent their regulatory approval, limit the commercial profile of an approved label, or result in significant negative consequences following marketing approval, if any.

As with most biological and vaccine products, use of our product candidates could be associated with side effects or adverse events which can vary in severity from minor reactions to death and in frequency from infrequent to prevalent. The potential for adverse events is especially acute in the oncology setting, where patients may have advanced disease, have compromised immune and other systems and be receiving numerous other therapies. Undesirable side effects or unacceptable toxicities caused by our product candidates could cause us, our future partners or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA, the EMA, the TGA or comparable regulatory authorities. Results of clinical trials of our product candidates could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of side effects.

If unacceptable side effects arise in the development of our product candidates, we, our future partners, the FDA, the EMA, the TGA, competent authorities of the European Union member states, ethics committees, the institutional review boards, or IRBs, at the institutions in which clinical trials of our product candidates are conducted, or a Data Safety Monitoring Board, or DSMB, could suspend or terminate our clinical trials. The FDA, the EMA, the TGA or comparable regulatory authorities could also order us or our future partners to cease clinical trials or deny approval of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. Treatment-related side effects could also affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete any of our or our partners’ clinical trials or result in potential product liability claims. In addition, these side effects may not be appropriately recognized or managed by the treating medical staff. We expect that we or our future partners may have to train medical personnel using our product candidates to understand the side effect profiles for our clinical trials and upon any commercialization of any of our product candidates. Inadequate

training in recognizing or managing the potential side effects of our product candidates could result in patient injury or death. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

Monitoring the safety of patients receiving our product candidates is challenging, which could adversely affect our and our partners’ ability to obtain regulatory approval and commercialize our product candidates.

In our ongoing and planned clinical trials, we have contracted with and are expected to continue to contract with academic medical centers and hospitals experienced in the assessment and management of toxicities arising during clinical trials. Nonetheless, these centers and hospitals may have difficulty observing patients and treating toxicities, which may be more challenging due to personnel changes, inexperience, shift changes, house staff coverage or related issues. This could lead to more severe or prolonged toxicities or even patient deaths, which could result in us, our future partners or the FDA, EMA or other comparable regulatory authority delaying, suspending or terminating one or more of our clinical trials, and which could jeopardize regulatory approval. We also expect the centers using our product candidates, if approved, on a commercial basis could have similar difficulty in managing adverse events. Medicines used at centers to help manage adverse side effects of our product candidates may not adequately control the side effects and may have a detrimental impact on the treatment. Use of these medicines may increase with new physicians and centers administering our product candidates.

In addition, even if our future partners successfully advance one or more of our product candidates into and through late stage clinical trials, such trials will likely only include a limited number of subjects and limited duration of exposure to our product candidates. As a result, we cannot be assured that adverse effects of our product candidates will not be discovered when a significantly larger number of patients are exposed to the product candidate. Further, any clinical trials may not be sufficient to determine the effect and safety consequences of taking our product candidates over a multi-year period.

If any of our product candidates receives marketing approval and we, our future partners or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by such products, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

Any of the foregoing events could prevent our future partners from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the particular product candidate, even if approved, and result in the loss of significant revenues to us, which would materially and adversely affect our results of operations and business. In addition, if one or more of our product candidates generally prove to be unsafe, our AI platform technologies and product pipeline could be affected, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Pre-clinical development, including the timeline from target identification to clinical development, is uncertain. Our pre-clinical programs may experience delays or may never advance to clinical trials, which would adversely affect our partners’ ability to obtain regulatory approvals or commercialize these programs on a timely basis or at all and would have an adverse effect on our business.

A portion of our product pipeline is in pre-clinical development and these programs could be delayed or not advance into the clinic. Before we can initiate clinical trials for product candidates, we must complete extensive pre-clinical studies, including IND-enabling Good Laboratory Practice toxicology testing that supports our planned INDs in the United States or similar applications in the EMA, the TGA and other jurisdictions. We must also complete extensive work on CMC activities (including collecting yield, purity and stability data) to be included in the IND filing or other equivalent regulatory filing. CMC activities for a new category of medicines require extensive manufacturing processes and analytical development, which are uncertain and lengthy. For instance, issues have occurred as we scale up our manufacturing and may occur in the future. In addition, we may have difficulty identifying appropriate buffers and storage conditions to enable sufficient shelf life of batches of our pre-clinical or clinical product candidates. If we are required to produce new batches of our product candidates due to insufficient shelf life, it may delay the commencement or completion of pre-clinical studies or clinical trials of such product candidates. For example, we cannot be certain of the timely completion or outcome of our pre-clinical testing and studies and cannot predict if the FDA, the EMA, the TGA or other regulatory authorities will accept the results of our pre-clinical testing or our proposed clinical programs or if the outcome of our pre-clinical testing, studies and CMC activities will ultimately support the further development of our programs. As a result, we cannot be sure that we will be able to submit INDs or similar applications for our pre-clinical programs on the timelines we expect, if at all, and we cannot be sure that submission of INDs or similar applications will result in the FDA or other regulatory authorities allowing clinical trials to begin. Additionally, while we have demonstrated our ability to move from target identification to clinical development within as little as 18 months with our EVX-02 product candidate, which is now in Phase 1/2a trial, no assurance can be given that we will be able to do the same with other product candidates in various phases of clinical development and trials in the future.

Clinical development involves a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome, and delays can occur for a variety of reasons outside of our or our future partners control. Clinical trials of our product candidates may be delayed, and certain programs may never advance in the clinic or may be more costly to conduct than we anticipate, any of which can affect our ability to fund our company and would have a material adverse impact on our business.

Clinical testing is expensive and complex and can take many years to complete. Its outcome is inherently uncertain. We and our future partners may not be able to initiate, may experience delays in, or may have to discontinue clinical trials for our product candidates. We and our future partners also may experience numerous unforeseen events during, or as a result of, any clinical trials that we or our future partners conduct that could delay or prevent us or our future partners from successfully developing our product candidates, including:

In addition, the regulatory agencies may conduct inspections of clinical trial sites. Any findings by regulatory agencies and failure to comply with requirements may lead to delay in development, approval and failure to commercialize the potential product candidate.

We could also encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, our future partners, the FDA, the EMA, the TGA or other regulatory authorities, ethics committees, or the IRBs of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted, or if such trial is recommended for suspension or termination by the DSMB. We may in the future be delayed in gaining clearance from the FDA, the EMA, the TGA or other regulators to initiate clinical trials through, among other things, the imposition of a clinical hold in order to address comments from such regulators on our or our partners’ clinical trial design or other elements of our or our partners’ clinical trials. A suspension or termination may be imposed 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, the EMA, the TGA or other regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold; unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects; failure to demonstrate a benefit, or adequate benefit-risk ratio, from using a product candidate; failure to establish or achieve clinically meaningful trial endpoints; changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions; or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. Many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates. We or future partners could also experience delays if physicians encounter unresolved ethical issues associated with enrolling patients in clinical trials of our product candidates in lieu of prescribing existing treatments that have established safety and efficacy profiles. We and our future partners must also complete extensive work on CMC activities that require extensive manufacturing processes and analytical development, which are uncertain and lengthy.

We expect the novel nature of our product candidates to create further challenges in obtaining regulatory approval. For example, the FDA, the EMA, the TGA and regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions have limited experience with commercial development of product candidates developed using our PIONEER AI technology platform. The FDA may require an Advisory Committee to deliberate on the adequacy of the safety and efficacy data to support licensure. The opinion of the Advisory Committee, although not binding, may have a significant impact on our or our partners’ ability to obtain licensure of the product candidates based on the completed clinical trials, as the FDA often adheres to the Advisory Committee’s recommendations. Accordingly, the regulatory approval pathway for our product candidates may be uncertain, complex, expensive and lengthy, and approval may not be certain.

Significant pre-clinical or nonclinical testing and studies or clinical trial delays for our product candidates also could allow our competitors to bring products to market before our future partners do, potentially impairing our future partners ‘ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and harming our business and results of operations. Any delays in the development of our product candidates may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

If we or our future partners encounter difficulties enrolling participants in our clinical trials, our clinical development activities could be delayed or otherwise adversely affected.

We and our future partners depend on enrollment of participants in the clinical trials for our product candidates. In the past, we and our future partners have found, and we or our future partners may in the future find, it difficult to enroll participants in clinical trials, which could delay or prevent clinical trials of our product candidates. Identifying and qualifying participants to participate in clinical trials of our product candidates is critical to our and our future partners’ success. The timing of our and our future partners clinical trials depends on the speed at which we and our future partners can recruit trial participants to participate in testing our product candidates. Delays in enrollment may result in increased costs or may affect the timing or outcome of the planned clinical trials, which could prevent completion of these trials and adversely affect our and our partners’ ability to advance the development of our product candidates. If trial participants are unwilling to participate in our or our partners’ studies because of negative publicity from adverse events in the clinical trials or other clinical trials of similar product candidates, or those related to a specific therapeutic area, or for other reasons, including competitive clinical trials for similar patient populations, the timeline for recruiting trial participants, conducting studies, and obtaining regulatory approval of potential products may be delayed. These delays could result in increased costs, delays in advancing our product development, delays in testing the effectiveness of our product candidates, or termination of the clinical studies altogether.

We and our future partners may not be able to identify, recruit and enroll a sufficient number of trial participants, or those with required or desired characteristics to achieve diversity in a study, to complete clinical trials of our product candidates in a timely manner. Patient and subject enrollment is affected by factors including:

In addition, our and our partners’ clinical trials will compete with other clinical trials for product candidates that are in the same therapeutic areas as our product candidates, and this competition will reduce the number and types of trial participants available to us and our future partners because some trial participants who might have opted to enroll in our or our partners’ clinical trials may instead opt to enroll in a trial being conducted by a third party. Since the number of qualified clinical investigators is limited, we and our future partners will likely conduct some of our or our partners’ clinical trials at the same clinical trial sites that some of our and our partners’ competitors use, which will reduce the number of trial participants who are available for our clinical trials at such clinical trial sites. Moreover, because in some cases our product candidates represent a departure from more traditional methods for disease treatment and prevention, potential trial participants and their doctors may be inclined to use conventional therapies or other new therapies rather than enroll trial participants in any future clinical trial involving patient-specific product candidates. Additionally, if new product candidates, such as gene editing therapies, show encouraging results, potential trial participants and their doctors may be inclined to enroll trial participants in clinical trials using those product candidates. If such new product candidates show discouraging results or other adverse safety indications, potential trial participants and their doctors may be less inclined to enroll trial participants in our or our future partners’ clinical trials.

A variety of risks associated with conducting research and clinical trials in the United States and other countries outside of Denmark and marketing our product candidates, if approved, by our future partners internationally could materially adversely affect our business.

While clinical trials of EVX-01, our lead product candidate are currently being conducted only in Denmark and Australia, we expect that clinical trials or commercialization of our product candidates, if approved, may take place globally. Accordingly, we expect that we and our future partners will be subject to additional risks related to operating in multiple countries, including:

These and other risks associated with our international operations and our collaborations with our future partners may materially adversely affect our ability to attain or maintain profitable operations.

Interim top-line and preliminary data from studies or trials that we and/or our future partners announce or publish from time to time may change as more 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 and/or our future partners may publish interim top-line or preliminary data from pre-clinical studies or clinical trials. Interim data are subject to the risk that one or more of the outcomes may materially change as more data become available. We and/or our future partners may also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of the analyses of data, and we and/or our future partners may not have received or had the opportunity to fully evaluate all data. As a result, the top-line results that we and/or our future partners report may differ from future results of the same studies, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. Preliminary or top-line data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result, interim and preliminary data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. Additionally, interim data from clinical trials that we and/or our future partners may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available. Adverse differences between preliminary or interim data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects.

Further, others, including the FDA, the EMA, the TGA and other regulatory agencies, may not accept or agree with our and/or our partners’ 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 our company in general. In addition, the information we and/or our future partners 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. Any information we and/or our future partners determine not to disclose may ultimately be deemed significant by you or others with respect to future decisions, conclusions, views, activities or otherwise regarding a particular product candidate or our business. If the top-line data that we and/or our future partners report differ from actual results, or if others, including regulatory authorities, disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain approval for, and commercialize, product candidates may be harmed, which could significantly harm our business prospects.

Results of pre-clinical studies and clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of future trial results.

Success in pre-clinical studies and early clinical trials does not ensure that later clinical trials will be successful. A number of companies in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries have suffered significant setbacks in clinical trials, even after positive results in earlier pre-clinical studies or clinical trials. These setbacks have been caused by, among other things, pre-clinical findings made while clinical trials were underway and safety or efficacy observations made in clinical trials, including previously unreported adverse events. Notwithstanding any potential promising results in earlier studies and trials, we and/or our future partners cannot be certain that we and/or our future partners will not face similar setbacks. Even if our or our partners’ clinical trials are completed, the results may not be sufficient to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates. In addition, the results of our pre-clinical studies may not be predictive of the results of outcomes in human clinical trials. For example, our EVX-01 cancer immunotherapy product candidate and any future product candidates may demonstrate different chemical, biological and pharmacological properties in patients than they do in pre-clinical mouse studies or may interact with human biological systems in unforeseen or harmful ways. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired pharmacological properties or safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through pre-clinical studies and initial clinical trials. Even if we and/or our future partners are able to initiate and complete clinical trials, the results may not be sufficient to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates.

Our planned clinical trials or those of our future partners may reveal significant adverse events not seen in our pre-clinical or nonclinical studies and may result in a safety profile that could delay or terminate clinical trials, or delay or prevent regulatory approval or market acceptance of any of our product candidates.

There is typically an extremely high rate of attrition for product candidates across categories of medicines proceeding through clinical trials. These product candidates may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy profile in later stages of clinical trials despite having progressed through nonclinical studies and initial clinical trials. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in later-stage clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or unacceptable safety profiles, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials. Most product candidates that commence clinical trials are never approved as products and there can be no assurance that any of our current or future clinical trials will ultimately be successful or support further clinical development of any of our product candidates.

Some of our product candidates may need to be co-administered with other developmental therapies or approved medicines. Such combinations may have additional side effects, which may be difficult to predict in future clinical trials.

If significant adverse events or other side effects are observed in any of our and/or our future partners’ current or future clinical trials, we and/or our future partners may have difficulty recruiting trial participants to any of our and/or our partners’ clinical trials, trial participants may withdraw from trials, or we and/or our future partners may be required to abandon the trials or our development efforts of one or more product candidates altogether. We, and/or our future partners, the FDA, the EMA, the TGA or other applicable regulatory authorities, ethics committees or an IRB may impose a clinical hold on, or suspend or terminate, clinical trials of a product candidate at any time for various reasons, including a belief that participants in such trials are being exposed to unacceptable health risks or adverse side effects. Some potential therapeutics developed in the biotechnology industry that initially showed therapeutic promise in early-stage trials have later been found to cause side effects that prevented their further development. Even if the side effects do not preclude the drug from obtaining or maintaining marketing approval, an unfavorable benefit-risk ratio may inhibit market acceptance of the approved product due to its tolerability versus other therapies. Any of these developments could materially harm our business, financial condition and prospects.

We and/or our future partners may not be able to develop or obtain approval for companion diagnostics required for commercialization of some of our product candidates.

Some of our product candidates may require the use of companion diagnostic tools. If safe and effective use of a biologic product depends on an in vitro companion diagnostic, then the FDA generally requires approval or clearance of the diagnostic, known as a companion diagnostic, concurrently with approval of the therapeutic product. To date, the FDA has generally required in vitro companion diagnostics intended to select the patients who will respond to cancer treatment to obtain a pre-market approval, or PMA, for that diagnostic, which can take up to several years, simultaneously with approval of the biologic product. Similarly, in the European Union, an in vitro companion diagnostic may be placed on the market only if it conforms to certain “essential requirements” and bears the Conformité Européenne Mark, or CE Mark, and the conformity assessment process to obtain the CE Mark can be lengthy.

For our patient-specific immunotherapy candidates, the FDA and similar regulatory authorities outside of the United States such as the EMA or the TGA, may require the development and regulatory approval of a companion diagnostic assay as a condition to approval. The FDA may require PMA supplemental approvals for use of that same companion diagnostic as a condition of approval of additional individualized therapeutic candidates. We do not have experience or capabilities in developing or commercializing companion diagnostics and plan to rely in large part on third parties to perform these functions. Companion diagnostic assays are subject to regulation by the FDA and other comparable regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions as medical devices and require separate regulatory approval prior to the use of such diagnostic assays with our therapeutic candidates. If we, or any third parties that we engage to assist us, are unable to successfully develop companion diagnostic assays for use with our therapeutic candidates, or are unable to obtain regulatory approval or experience delays in either development or obtaining regulatory approval, we and/or our future partners may be unable to identify patients with the specific profile targeted by our product candidates for enrollment in our clinical trials. Accordingly, further investment may be required to further develop or obtain the required regulatory approval for the relevant companion diagnostic assay, which would delay or substantially impact our ability to conduct additional clinical trials or obtain regulatory approval.

The FDA, EMA, TGA or other regulatory authorities may not consider the endpoints of our clinical trials to provide clinically meaningful results.

There may not be pharmacologic therapies approved to treat the underlying causes of many diseases that we and/or our future partners may address in the future. For instance, we and/or our future partners may apply our technology to develop therapeutics in indications such as certain rare diseases, including some for which no or few clinical trials have been attempted. As a result, any future design and conduct of clinical trials of product candidates for the treatment of certain rare diseases may take longer, be more costly, or be less effective as part of the novelty of development in these diseases. Even if we decide to conduct clinical trials and the FDA does find our success criteria to be sufficiently validated and clinically meaningful, we may not achieve the pre-specified endpoint to a degree of statistical significance in any pivotal or other clinical trials we and/or our future partners may conduct for our programs. Further, even if we and/or our future partners do achieve the pre-specified criteria, our and/or our partners’ trials may produce results that are unpredictable or inconsistent with the results of the more traditional efficacy endpoints in the trial. The FDA also could give overriding weight to other efficacy endpoints over a primary endpoint, even if we and/or our future partners achieve statistically significant results on that endpoint, if we and/or our future partners do not do so on the secondary efficacy endpoints. The FDA also weighs the benefits of a product against its risks and the FDA may view the efficacy results in the context of safety as not being supportive of licensure. Other regulatory authorities in Europe and other countries may make similar findings with respect to these endpoints.

The FDA, EMA, TGA or other comparable regulatory authorities may disagree with our and/or our future partners’ regulatory plan and we and/or our future partners may fail to obtain regulatory approval of our product candidates.

If the results of our and/or our future partners’ clinical trials are sufficiently compelling, we and/or our future partners intend to discuss with the FDA, the EMA, the TGA or other regulatory authorities, submission of a BLA, EMAA, AMAA or other comparable submissions or to obtain regulatory approval in the United States or elsewhere, an European Union marketing authorization, an Australian marketing authorization or other regulatory authorization for our product candidates. However, we and/or our future partners do not have any agreement or guidance from the FDA that our and/or our partners’ regulatory development plans will be sufficient for submission of a BLA, EMAA, AMAA or other comparable submissions or to obtain regulatory approval in the United States or elsewhere for any of our product candidates. The FDA, EMA, TGA or other regulatory agencies may grant accelerated approval for our product candidates and, as a condition for accelerated approval, the FDA, EMA, TGA or other regulatory agencies may require a sponsor of a drug or biologic receiving accelerated approval to perform post-marketing studies to verify and describe the predicted effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical endpoint, and the drug or biologic may be subject to withdrawal procedures by the FDA, EMA, TGA or other regulatory agencies that are more accelerated than those available for regular approvals. In addition, the standard of care may change with the approval of new products in the same indications that we are studying. This may result in the FDA, EMA, TGA or other regulatory agencies requesting additional studies to show that our product candidate is superior to the new products.

Our and/or our future partners’ clinical trial results may also not support approval. In addition, our product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval for many reasons, including the following:

We and/or our future partners may not be able to file INDs with the FDA, clinical trial applications with the competent authorities of European Union member states, clinical trial applications with the competent authorities in Australia or similar applications with other comparable regulatory authorities to commence additional clinical trials on the timelines we and/or our future partners expect, and even if we and/or our future partners are able to, one or more of these regulatory authorities may not permit us to proceed.

The timing of filing on our product candidates is dependent on further pre-clinical, clinical and manufacturing success. We and/or our future partners cannot be sure that filing of an IND or IND amendment with the FDA, a clinical trial application with the competent authorities of European Union member states, a clinical trial application with the competent authorities in Australia or similar application with other comparable regulatory authorities will result in the FDA, the competent authorities of European Union member states, the competent authorities in Australia or any comparable regulatory authority allowing testing and clinical trials to begin, or that, once begun, issues will not arise that result in the suspension or termination of such clinical trials. Additionally, even if such regulatory authorities agree with the design and implementation of the clinical trials set forth in an IND, clinical trial application or similar applications, no assurance can be given that such regulatory authorities will not change their requirements in the future.

We and/or our future partners may seek orphan drug designation for some or all of our product candidates across various indications, but we and/or our future partners may be unable to obtain such designations or to maintain the benefits associated with orphan drug designation, including market exclusivity, which may cause our revenue, if any, to be reduced.

We and/or our future partners may seek for orphan drug designation in the United States and other jurisdictions, such as the European Union, where a similar designation may be available for our product candidates. In the United States, under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan drug designation to a drug or biologic intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is defined as one occurring in a patient population of fewer than 200,000 in the United States, or a patient population of 200,000 or greater in the United States where there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug or biologic will be recovered from sales in the United States. In the United States, orphan drug 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 that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including a full new drug application, or NDA, or a BLA, to market the same drug or biologic 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 original manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient product quantity. Similar rules apply in the European Union and Australia with respect to drugs or biologics designated as orphan medicinal products.

In addition, exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be limited if we seek approval for an indication broader than the orphan-designated indication or may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective. Further, even if we and/or our future partners obtain orphan drug exclusivity for a product, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product from competition because different drugs with different active moieties may receive and be approved for the same condition, and only the first applicant to receive approval will receive the benefits of marketing exclusivity. Even after an orphan-designated product is approved, the FDA can subsequently approve a later drug with the same active moiety for the same condition if the FDA concludes that the later drug is clinically superior if it is shown to be safer, more effective, or makes a major contribution to patient care. Similar considerations apply in the European Union and Australia with respect to drugs or biologics designated as orphan medicinal products. 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. In addition, while we and/or our future partners may seek orphan drug designation for our product candidates, we may never receive such designations.

We and/or our future partners may seek breakthrough therapy or fast-track designation for one or more of our product candidates, but we and/or our future partners may not receive such designations. Even if we and/or our future partners do receive such designations, it may not lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process, and it may not increase the likelihood that such product candidates will receive marketing approval.

We and/or our future partners may seek a breakthrough therapy designation in the United States and other jurisdictions, such as the European Union, where a similar designation may be available, for one or more of our product candidates. In the United States, a breakthrough therapy is defined as a drug that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug 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 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. Drugs designated as breakthrough therapies by the FDA are also eligible for priority review if supported by clinical data at the time of the submission of the BLA.

Designation as a breakthrough therapy is at the discretion of the FDA. Accordingly, even if we and/or our future partners believe that one of our product candidates meets the criteria for designation as a breakthrough therapy, the FDA may disagree and instead determine not to make such designation. In any event, the receipt of a breakthrough therapy designation for a drug may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to drugs considered for approval under conventional FDA procedures and it would not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, even if one or more of our product candidates qualify as breakthrough therapies, the FDA may later decide that the product candidate no longer meets the conditions for qualification, or it may decide that the time period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened.

We and/or our future partners may also seek Fast Track Designation in the United States and/or a Conditional Market Authorization, or CMA, in the European Union for some of our product candidates. If a therapy is intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening condition and the therapy demonstrates the potential to address significant unmet medical needs for this condition, the drug sponsor may apply for Fast Track Designation. The FDA has broad discretion whether or not to grant this designation, and even if we and/or our future partners believe a particular product candidate is eligible for this designation, we cannot assure you that the FDA would decide to grant it. Even if we do receive Fast Track Designation, we may not experience a faster development process, review or approval compared to conventional FDA procedures. The FDA may withdraw Fast Track Designation if it believes that the designation is no longer supported by data from our clinical development program. Fast Track Designation alone does not guarantee qualification for the FDA’s priority review procedures.

We expect some of the product candidates we develop will be regulated as biologics in the United States and elsewhere and therefore they may be subject to competition from biosimilars approved through an abbreviated regulatory pathway.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, or the ACA, includes a subtitle called the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, or the BPCIA, which created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are biosimilar to or interchangeable with an FDA-approved reference biological product. Under the BPCIA, an application for a biosimilar product may not be submitted to the FDA until four years following the date that the reference product was first approved by the FDA. In addition, the approval of a biosimilar product may not be made effective by the FDA until 12 years from the date on which the reference product was first approved. During this 12-year period of exclusivity, another company may still market a competing version of the reference product if the FDA approves a BLA for the competing product containing the sponsor’s own pre-clinical data and data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of the other company’s product. The law is complex and is still being interpreted and implemented by the FDA. As a result, its ultimate impact, implementation and meaning are subject to uncertainty.

We believe that any of our product candidates approved as a biological product under a BLA should qualify for a 12-year period of exclusivity. However, there is a risk that this exclusivity could be shortened due to congressional action or otherwise, or that the FDA will not consider our product candidates to be reference products for competing products, potentially creating the opportunity for generic competition sooner than anticipated. Other aspects of the BPCIA, some of which may impact the BPCIA exclusivity provisions, have also been the subject of recent litigation. Moreover, the extent to which a biosimilar, once approved, will be substituted for any one of our reference products in a way that is similar to traditional generic substitution for non-biological products is not yet clear, and will depend on a number of marketplace and regulatory factors that are still developing.

We and/or our future partners may be unable to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates under applicable international regulatory requirements. The denial or delay of such approval would delay commercialization of our product candidates and adversely impact our potential to generate revenue, our business and our results of operations.

Approval by the FDA in the United States, if obtained, does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries or jurisdictions. In order to eventually market any of our product candidates in any other jurisdiction, we and/or our future partners must establish and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements on a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis regarding safety and efficacy. In addition, clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries, and regulatory approval in one country does not guarantee regulatory approval in any other country. Approval processes vary among countries and can involve additional product testing and validation and additional administrative review periods.

Seeking regulatory approval in other jurisdictions could result in difficulties and costs for us and require additional pre-clinical studies or clinical trials which could be costly and time-consuming. Regulatory requirements can vary widely from country to country and could delay or prevent the introduction of our products in those countries. The European Union, Australia and other jurisdictions’ regulatory approval processes involve all of the risks associated with FDA approval. We do not have any product candidates approved for sale in any jurisdiction, including international markets, and we do not have experience in obtaining regulatory approval in international markets. If we and/or our future partners fail to comply with regulatory requirements in international markets or to obtain and maintain required approvals, or if regulatory approvals in international markets are delayed, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of our products will be unrealized.

Even if we and/or our future partners receive regulatory approval of our product candidates, we and/or our future partners will be subject to ongoing regulatory obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense. We may be subject to penalties if we and/or our future partners fail to comply with regulatory requirements or experience unanticipated problems with our product candidates.

Even if we and/or our future partners obtain regulatory approval in a jurisdiction, the applicable regulatory authority may still impose significant restrictions on the indicated uses or marketing of our product or impose ongoing requirements for potentially costly post-approval studies or post-market surveillance. For example, the holder of an approved BLA is obligated to monitor and report adverse events and any failure of a product to meet the specifications in the BLA. The holder of an approved BLA must also submit new or supplemental applications and obtain FDA approval for certain changes to the approved product, product labeling or manufacturing process. Advertising and promotional materials must comply with FDA rules and are subject to FDA review, in addition to other potentially applicable federal and state laws.

If we and/or our future partners fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements following approval of any of our product candidates, a regulatory agency may:

Any government investigation of alleged violations of law could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity. The occurrence of any event or penalty described above may inhibit our and/or our partners’ ability to commercialize any approved products and generate revenues.

If any of our product candidates cause undesirable side effects, it could delay or prevent their regulatory approval, limit the commercial potential, or result in significant negative consequences following any potential marketing approval. Product candidates we and/or our future partners may develop may be associated with an adverse immune response or other serious adverse events, undesirable side effects or unexpected characteristics. In addition to serious adverse events or side effects caused by any of our product candidates, the administration process or related procedures also can cause undesirable side effects. If any such events occur, the clinical trials of any of our product candidates could be suspended or terminated.

If in the future, we and/or our future partners are unable to demonstrate that such adverse events were caused by factors other than our product candidates, the FDA, the EMA, the TGA or other regulatory authorities could order us to cease further development of, or deny approval of, any of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. Even if we and/or our future partners are able to demonstrate that all future serious adverse events are not product-related, such occurrences could affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled trial participants to complete the trial. Moreover, if we and/or our future partners elect, or are required, to delay, suspend or terminate any clinical trial of any of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of such product candidates may be harmed and our ability to generate product sale revenues from any of these product candidates may be delayed or eliminated. Any of these occurrences may harm our and/or our partners’ ability to identify and develop product candidates, and may harm our business, financial condition, result of operations and prospects significantly.

Additionally, if we and/or our future partners successfully obtain regulatory approval for a product candidate, the FDA, the EMA, the TGA or other regulatory authority could require us to adopt a REMS or a risk management plan, or RMP, to ensure that the benefits of treatment with such product candidate outweigh the risks for each potential patient, which may include, among other things, a medication guide outlining the risks of the product for distribution to patients, a communication plan to health care practitioners, extensive patient monitoring, or distribution systems and processes that are highly controlled, restrictive, and more costly than what is typical for the industry. Furthermore, if we, our future partners or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by any product that we and/or our future partners develop based on one or more of our product candidates, several potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of any products we and/or our future partners may identify and develop based on one or more of our product candidates and could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

If we and/or our future partners are successful in gaining approval for any of our product candidates, we and/or our future partners will continue to face significant regulatory oversight of the manufacturing and distribution of our products. Product manufacturers and their facilities are subject to payment of user fees and continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA, the EMA, the TGA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with Current Good Manufacturing Practices, or cGMP, and adherence to commitments made in the BLA. If we, our future partners or a regulatory agency discovers previously unknown problems with a product such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where the product is manufactured, a regulatory agency may impose restrictions relative to that product or the manufacturing facility, including requiring recall or withdrawal of the product from the market or suspension of manufacturing.

If we and/or our future partners, as applicable, are not successful in discovering, developing and commercializing additional product candidates beyond our current portfolio, our ability to expand our business and achieve our strategic objectives would be impaired.

A key element of our strategy is to discover, develop and, through our future partners, potentially commercialize additional product candidates beyond our current portfolio to treat various conditions and in a variety of therapeutic areas. We intend to do so by investing in our own AI technology platforms to engage in drug and target discovery efforts, exploring potential collaborations for the development of new product candidates, and in-licensing delivery technologies. Identifying new product candidates requires substantial technical, financial and human resources, whether or not any product candidates are ultimately identified. Even if we identify product candidates that initially show promise, we and/or our future partners may fail to successfully develop and commercialize such product candidates for many reasons, including the following:

If we are unsuccessful in identifying, developing and, through our future partners, commercializing additional products, our potential for growth may be impaired.

Changes in funding for the FDA, the SEC and other government agencies could hinder their ability to hire and retain key leadership and other personnel, prevent new or existing product candidates from being developed or commercialized in a timely manner or otherwise prevent those agencies from performing normal functions on which the operation of our business may rely, 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, ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept payment of user fees, and statutory, regulatory, and policy changes. Average review times at the agency has fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of the SEC and other government agencies on which our operations may rely, including those that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable.

Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies may also slow the time necessary for new drugs to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years, including beginning on December 22, 2018, the United States government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA and the SEC, has had to furlough critical FDA, SEC and other government employees and stop critical activities. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA to timely review and process its regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. Further, in our operations as a public company, future government shutdowns could impact our ability to access the public markets and obtain necessary capital in order to properly capitalize and continue our operations.

Since March 2020, when foreign and domestic inspections of facilities were largely placed on hold, the FDA has been working to resume routine surveillance, bioresearch monitoring and pre-approval inspections on a prioritized basis. The FDA has developed a rating system to assist in determining when and where it is safest to conduct prioritized domestic inspections. As of May 2021, certain inspections, such as foreign preapproval, surveillance, and for-cause inspections that are not deemed mission-critical, remain temporarily postponed. In April 2021, the FDA issued guidance for industry formally announcing plans to employ remote interactive evaluations, using risk management methods, to meet user fee commitments and goal dates and in May 2021 announced plans to continue progress toward resuming standard operational levels. Should FDA determine that an inspection is necessary for approval and an inspection cannot be completed during the review cycle due to restrictions on travel, and the FDA does not determine a remote interactive evaluation to be adequate, the agency has stated that it generally intends to issue a complete response letter or defer action on the application until an inspection can be completed. In 2020 and 2021, a number of companies announced receipt of complete response letters due to the FDA’s inability to complete required inspections for their applications. Regulatory authorities outside the United States may adopt similar restrictions or other policy measures in response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and may experience delays in their regulatory activities.

Additionally, as of May 26, 2021, the FDA noted it is continuing to ensure timely reviews of applications for medical products during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic in line with its user fee performance goals and conducting mission critical domestic and foreign inspections to ensure compliance of manufacturing facilities with FDA quality standards. However, the FDA may not be able to continue its current pace and approval timelines could be extended, including where a pre-approval inspection or an inspection of clinical sites is required and due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and travel restrictions FDA is unable to complete such required inspections during the review period. In 2020 and 2021, a number of companies announced receipt of complete response letters due to the FDA's inability to complete required inspections for their applications.

If the FDA becomes unable to continue its current level of performance, we and/or our future partners could experience delays and setbacks for our product candidates and for any approvals we and/or our future partners may seek which could adversely affect our business.

Our business, operations and clinical development plans and timelines have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and if the pandemic continues our business operations could be adversely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and other health epidemics or pandemics, on the manufacturing, clinical trial and other business activities performed by us or by third parties with whom we conduct business, including our CMOs, CROs, shippers and others.

Our business has been and could be further adversely affected by health epidemics wherever we have clinical trial sites or other business operations. In addition, health epidemics could cause significant disruption in the operations of third-party CMOs, CROs and other third parties upon whom we rely. For example, in December 2019, a novel strain of coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, causing a disease referred to as COVID-19, was reported to have surfaced in Wuhan, China. Since then COVID-19 has spread worldwide. In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 outbreak a pandemic, and the United States government ordered the closure of all non-essential businesses, imposed social distancing measures, “shelter-in-place” orders and restrictions on travel between the United States, Europe, Australia and other countries. The global pandemic and government measures taken in response have also had a significant impact on businesses and commerce worldwide, as worker shortages have occurred; supply chains have been disrupted; facilities and production have been suspended across a variety of industries; 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.

We may be required to develop and implement additional clinical trial policies and procedures designed to help protect subjects from the COVID-19 virus. For example, in March 2020, the FDA issued a guidance on conducting clinical trials during the pandemic, which was updated in July 2020, January 2021 and August 2021. The guidance describes a number of considerations for sponsors of clinical trials impacted by the pandemic, including the requirement to include in the clinical trial report (or as a separate document) contingency measures implemented to manage the trial and any disruption of the trial as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic; a list of all subjects affected by the COVID-19 pandemic-related trial disruptions by unique subject identifier and by investigational site and a description of how the individual's participation was altered; and analyses and corresponding discussions that address the impact of implemented contingency measures (e.g., participant discontinuation from investigational product and/or trial, alternative procedures used to collect critical safety and/or efficacy data) on the safety and efficacy results reported for the trial. In its most recent update to this guidance, the FDA addressed questions received from clinical practitioners who are adapting their operations in a pandemic environment. These questions focused on, among other things, when to suspend, continue or initiate a trial and how to submit changes to protocols for INDs and handle remote site monitoring visits. There is no assurance that this guidance governing clinical trials during the pandemic will remain in effect or, even if it does, that it will help address the risks and challenges enumerated above.

Other potential impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on our ongoing clinical trial include patient dosing and trial monitoring, which may be paused or delayed due to changes in policies at various clinical sites, federal, state, local or foreign laws, rules and regulations, including quarantines or other travel restrictions, prioritization of healthcare resources toward pandemic efforts, including diminished attention of physicians serving as our clinical trial investigators and reduced availability of site staff supporting the conduct of our clinical trial, interruption or delays in the operations of the FDA, the EMA, the TGA and other similar regulatory agencies, or other reasons related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

If the COVID-19 pandemic continues, other aspects of our ongoing clinical trial and future planned clinical trials may be adversely affected, delayed or interrupted, including, for example, site initiation, patient recruitment and enrollment, availability of clinical trial materials, clinical trial site data monitoring and efficacy, safety and translational data collection, and data analysis. Some patients and clinical investigators may not be able to comply with clinical trial protocols and patients may choose to withdraw from our trials or we may have to pause enrollment or we may choose to or be required to pause enrollment and/or patient dosing in our ongoing or planned clinical trials in order to preserve health resources and protect trial participants. It is unknown how long these pauses or disruptions could continue. Patients may need to withdraw due to COVID-19 infections or experience increased adverse events and deaths in our clinical trials due to COVID-19 related infections.

In addition, we depend on a global supply chain, including timely shipment of patient specimens and ingredients, to manufacture product candidates used in our pre-clinical studies and clinical trials. Quarantines, “shelter-in-place” and similar government orders, or the expectation that such orders, shutdowns or other restrictions could occur, whether related to COVID-19 or other epidemics, could impact personnel at third-party manufacturing facilities in the United States, Europe and other countries, or the availability or cost of materials, any of which factors, either individually or collectively, could disrupt our supply chain.

Additionally, it has been widely reported that there has been a global shortage of microchips that has been affecting almost every industry, which has impacted the production of machinery and final products. This shortage could adversely impact our suppliers ability to meet their contractual obligations to provide us with necessary products and materials. If our relationships with our suppliers or other vendors are terminated or scaled back as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic or other epidemics, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative suppliers or vendors or do so on commercially reasonable terms or in a timely manner. Replacing or adding additional suppliers or vendors involves substantial cost and requires management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new supplier or vendor commences work. As a result, delays may occur, which could adversely impact our ability to meet our desired clinical development and any future commercialization timelines. Although we carefully manage our relationships with our suppliers and vendors, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not harm our business.

In addition, our business, including our pre-clinical studies and clinical trials have been and may continue to be affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinical site initiation, patient enrollment and activities that require visits to clinical sites, including data monitoring, have been and may continue to be delayed due to prioritization of hospital resources toward the COVID-19 pandemic or concerns among patients about participating in clinical trials during a pandemic. Some patients may have difficulty following certain aspects of clinical trial protocols if quarantines impede patient movement or interrupt healthcare services. For example, some patients, may not be able to attend follow-ups and comply with trial protocols. These challenges have and, in the future, may continue to also increase the costs of completing our clinical trials. Similarly, if we are unable to successfully recruit and retain patients and principal investigators and site staff who, as healthcare providers, may have heightened exposure to COVID-19 or experience additional restrictions by their institutions, city or state, our clinical trial operations could be adversely impacted.

While we have not closed our offices, many of our employees, including members of our executive management, have periodically worked remotely during the COVID-19 pandemic and a number of our employees have contracted COVID-19 requiring them to miss a number of days of work while recovering, which, if either of these situations continue, may adversely affect our business operations.

In the event that government authorities were to enhance current restrictions, our employees who currently are not working from home may no longer be able to access our facilities, including our laboratories and our operations may be further limited or curtailed. An increase in the number of personnel working from home may negatively impact productivity, or disrupt, delay, or otherwise adversely impact our business. Further, any such enhanced restrictions may also impact the availability or cost of materials, which would disrupt our supply chain and manufacturing efforts and could affect our ability to conduct ongoing and planned clinical trials and preparatory activities. We may also face difficulties in obtaining access to manufacturing slots for our product candidates. For example, three vaccines for COVID-19 were granted Emergency Use Authorization by the FDA in late 2020 and early 2021, and resultant demand for vaccines and potential for manufacturing facilities and materials to be commandeered under the Defense Production Act of 1950,

or equivalent foreign legislation, may make it more difficult to obtain materials or manufacturing slots for the products needed for our clinical trials, which could lead to delays in these trials.

In addition, personnel working from home could increase our cyber security risk, create data accessibility concerns, and make us more susceptible to communication disruptions, any of which could adversely impact our business operations or delay necessary interactions with local and federal regulators, ethics committees, manufacturing sites, research or clinical trial sites and other important agencies and contractors. Further, we and our third-party service providers, including our CROs, the clinical trial sites, our manufacturers and suppliers, may experience staffing shortages as a result of personnel contracting COVID-19 and its variants such as Delta and Omicron.

The spread of COVID-19, which has caused a broad impact globally, may materially affect us economically. While the potential economic impact brought by, and the duration of, COVID-19 may be difficult to assess or predict, a widespread pandemic has resulted in significant disruption of global financial markets, resulting in an economic downturn that could continue to significantly impact our business and operations and may reduce our ability to access capital, which could in the future negatively affect our liquidity. In addition, a recession or market correction resulting from the spread of COVID-19 could materially affect our business and the value of the ordinary shares and ADSs.

Further, we may experience additional disruptions that could severely impact our business and clinical trials, including:

These and similar, and perhaps more severe, disruptions in our operations could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition and/or prospects.

The global pandemic of COVID-19 continues to evolve rapidly. The ultimate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic or a similar health epidemic is highly uncertain and subject to change. We do not yet know the full extent of potential delays or impacts on our business, our clinical trials, healthcare systems or the global economy as a whole. However, these effects could have a material impact on our operations, and we continue to monitor the COVID-19 situation closely. Finally, initially, the outbreak of COVID-19 led to steep declines in the Dow Industrial Average and other domestic and international stock indices at the end of February and during March and April 2020. While the markets have rebounded since then, recent concerns over the “Delta variant” and the “Omicron variant” and the impact they may have on the United States and global economies, have led to “risk-off” sessions in the global markets.

The trading prices for our ADS and the shares of other biopharmaceutical and biotechnology companies have been highly volatile as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and the trading prices for our ADSs could continue to experience high volatility. As a result, we may face difficulties raising additional capital through sales of our ADSs or any such sales may be on unfavorable terms. In addition, a recession, depression or other sustained adverse market event resulting from the spread of the COVID-19 could materially and adversely affect our business and the value of our ADSs.

To the extent the COVID-19 pandemic adversely affects our business, results of operations, cash flows, financial condition and/or prospects, it may also have the effect of heightening many of the other risks described in this “Risk Factors” section.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and ancillary developments may have an adverse effect on our business.

The recent invasion of Ukraine by Russia, the resulting conflict and retaliatory measures by the global community have created global security concerns, including the possibility of expanded regional or global conflict, which have had, are likely to continue to have, short-term and likely longer-term adverse impacts on Ukraine and Europe and around the globe. Potential ramifications include disruption of the supply chain including research activities and complications with the conduct of ongoing and future clinical trials of our product candidates, including patient enrollment. We and our collaborators rely on global networks of contract research organizations and clinical trial sites to enroll patients. Delays in research activities or in the conduct of our clinical trials could increase associated costs and, depending upon the duration of any delays, require us to find alternative suppliers at additional expense. In addition, the conflict between Russia and the Ukraine has had significant ramifications on global financial markets, which may adversely impact our ability to raise capital on favorable terms or at all.

Risks Related to the Manufacturing of our Product Candidates and Future Pipeline

We and/or our future partners may encounter difficulties in manufacturing, product release, shelf life, testing, storage, supply chain management or shipping. If we, and/or our future partners or any of the third-party manufacturers we and/or our future partners work with encounter such difficulties, our and/or our future partners’ ability to supply materials for clinical trials or any approved product could be delayed or stopped.

The manufacturing processes for our product candidates are novel and complex. Specifically, due to the nature of our patient-specific immunotherapies and novel delivery technologies, we and/or our future partners may encounter difficulties in manufacturing, product release, shelf life, testing, storage and supply chain management, or shipping. These difficulties could be due to any number of reasons including, but not limited to, complexities of producing batches at larger scale, equipment failure, choice and quality of raw materials and excipients, analytical testing technology, and product instability. In an effort to optimize product features, we have in the past and we and/or our future partners may in the future make changes to our product candidates in their manufacturing and stability formulation and conditions. This may in the future result in our and/or our future partners’ having to resupply batches for pre-clinical or clinical activities when there is insufficient product stability during storage and insufficient supply. Insufficient stability or shelf life of our product candidates could materially delay our and/or our future partners’ ability to continue the clinical trial for that product candidate or require us and/or our future partners to begin a new clinical trial with a newly formulated drug product, due to the need to manufacture additional pre-clinical or clinical supply.

For patient-specific therapies, we and/or our future partners may encounter issues with our and/or our future partners’ ability to timely and efficiently manufacture product given the on-demand requirements of such therapies, thereby potentially impacting clinical and commercial supply.

As we and/or our future partners continue developing new manufacturing processes for our drug substances and drug products for infectious diseases, the changes we and/or our future partners implement to manufacturing process may in turn impact specification and stability of our drug products. Changes in our manufacturing processes may lead to failure of lots and this could lead to substantial delays in our clinical trials. Our product candidates for infectious diseases may prove to have a stability profile that leads to a lower than desired shelf life of the final approved immunotherapy. This poses risk in supply requirements, wasted stock and higher cost of goods.

We and/or our future partners may be dependent on a number of equipment providers who are also implementing novel technology. Further, we and/or our future partners may develop custom manufacturing equipment for certain of our product candidates. If such equipment malfunctions or we and/or our future partners encounter unexpected performance issues, we and/or our future partners could encounter delays or interruptions to clinical and commercial supply.

Due to the number of different programs, we and/or our future partners may have cross contamination of products inside of our factories, CROs, suppliers, or in the clinic that affect the integrity of our product candidates. Additionally, for some programs the manufacturing scale is extremely small compared to the standard volumes of supply, such that we and/or our future partners run the risk of contaminating the process each time we and/or our future partners reopen a container to use remaining supplies.

As we and/or our future partners scale the manufacturing output for particular programs, we plan to continuously improve yield, purity, and the pharmaceutical properties of our product candidates from clinical stage studies through commercial launch, including shelf life stability, and solubility properties of drug product and drug substance. Due to continuous improvement in manufacturing processes, we and/or our future partners may switch processes for a particular program during development. However, after the change in process, more time is required for pharmaceutical property testing, such as six- or 12-month stability testing. That may require resupplying clinical material or making additional cGMP batches to keep up with clinical trial demand before such pharmaceutical property testing is completed.

We and/or our future partners may utilize a number of raw materials and excipients that are either new to the pharmaceutical industry or are being employed in a novel manner. Some of these raw materials and excipients have not been scaled to a level to support commercial supply and could experience unexpected manufacturing or testing failures, or supply shortages. Such issues with raw materials and excipients could cause delays or interruptions to clinical and commercial supply of our product candidates. Further, one or more of our programs may have a single source of supply for raw materials and excipients. Additionally, we and our manufacturers may experience manufacturing difficulties due to resource constraints or as a result of labor disputes or unstable political environments, such as recent events in Ukraine and Russia, or other geopolitical uncertainty. If we and/or our our future partners and manufacturers were to encounter any of these difficulties, or otherwise fail to comply with their contractual obligations, our ability to manufacture our products, or to make our product candidates available for clinical trials could be jeopardized. Any such delay or interruption in the supply of clinical trial supplies could delay the completion of clinical trials, increase the costs associated with maintaining clinical trial programs and, depending upon the period of delay, require us to commence new clinical trials at additional expense or terminate clinical trials completely.

We and/or our future partners may learn that any or all of our product candidates are less stable than desired. We and/or our future partners may also find that transportation conditions negatively impact product quality. This may require changes to the formulation or manufacturing process for one or more of our product candidates and result in delays or interruptions to clinical or commercial supply. In addition, the cost associated with such transportation services and the limited pool of vendors may also add additional risks of supply disruptions.

The occurrence of any of these factors could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

Certain of our product candidates are uniquely manufactured for each patient and we and/or our future partners may encounter difficulties in production, particularly with respect to scaling our manufacturing capabilities. If we, and/or our future partners or any of the third-party manufacturers with whom we and/or our future partners contract encounter these types of difficulties, our and/or our future partners’ ability to provide our product candidates for clinical trials or our products for patients, if approved, could be delayed or stopped, or we and/or our future partners may be unable to maintain a commercially viable cost structure.

Using our PIONEER AI platform technology, we identify and custom design product candidates that are unique and tailored specifically for each patient. Manufacturing unique lots of these product candidates is susceptible to product loss or failure due to issues with:

One or more of our future partners may continue to evolve their manufacturing equipment. This equipment may not function as designed, which may lead to deviations in the drug products being produced. This can lead to increased batch failure and the inability to supply patients enrolled in the clinical trial. If our clinical development plans are expanded, due to the custom nature of the equipment and single-use assemblies, we may not be able to supply this expanded need reliably without significant investments. In addition, there will be considerable time to scale up the manufacturing facilities or build new facilities before our future partners can begin to meet any commercial demand if one or more of our product candidates are approved. This expansion or addition of new facilities could also lead to product comparability issues, which can further delay introduction of new capacity.

As certain of our product candidates may be manufactured for each individual patient, we and/or our future partners will be required to maintain a chain of identity with respect to each patient’s tissue sample, sequence data derived from such tissue sample, analyze results of such patient’s genomic analysis, and the custom manufactured product for each patient. Maintaining such a chain of identity is difficult and complex, and failure to do so could result in product mix-up, adverse patient outcomes, loss of product, or regulatory action, including withdrawal of any approved products from the market. Production of our patient-specific product candidates developed using our PIONEER AI platform technology involves a novel micro-batch production process based on a one patient per batch level, which necessarily increases the need for vigilant systems to be employed in order to avoid any such mix-ups We have in the past experienced one case of a product mix-up, which did not result in any adverse effects on the patient. Further, as our product candidates are developed through early-stage clinical studies to later-stage clinical trials towards approval and commercialization, we expect that multiple aspects of the complicated collection, analysis, manufacture and delivery processes will be modified in an effort to optimize processes and results. These changes may not achieve the intended objectives, and any of these changes could cause our product candidates to perform differently than we expect, potentially affecting the results of clinical trials.

Our or our future partners’ inability to manufacture or have manufactured sufficient quantities of our product candidates, or our or our future partners’ failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, would materially and adversely affect our business.

Manufacturing is a vital component of our patient-specific immunotherapy approach as well as our bacterial vaccines. All manufacturing must be performed in compliance with cGMP regulations. We expect to rely on external CMOs for the manufacture of our product candidates and at this time, we have limited redundancy among our manufacturing capabilities. For our patient-specific immunotherapies, we and/or our future partners do not maintain product reserves due to the patient-specific nature of our product candidates. If any of our manufacturing facilities or the facilities of our CMOs experiences difficulties, including related to manufacturing, product release, shelf life, testing, storage and supply chain management or shipping, our and/or our future partners’

clinical development programs may be delayed or suspended until we and/or our future partners can resume operations. We may also be required to incur significant expenditures to resolve such difficulties.

Our CMOs’ facilities are subject to various regulatory requirements and will be subject to inspection by the FDA, EMA or other regulatory authorities. If our CMOs cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the strict regulatory requirements of the FDA, EMA or comparable regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions, we and or our future partners may not be able to rely on our CMOs’ manufacturing facilities for the manufacture of our product candidates. If the FDA, EMA or another comparable regulatory authority finds our facilities inadequate for the manufacture of our product candidates or if such facilities are subject to enforcement action in the future or are otherwise inadequate, we and /or our future partners may need to find alternative manufacturing facilities, which would significantly impact our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for or market our product candidates. Additionally, we and/or our future partners may experience manufacturing difficulties due to resource constraints or as a result of labor disputes or unstable political environments. If we and/or our future partners were to encounter any of these difficulties, our and/or our future partners’ ability to provide our product candidate to patients in clinical trials, or to provide product for the treatment of patients once approved, would be jeopardized.

We are, and our future partners shall be subject to regulatory and operational risks associated with the physical and digital infrastructure at both our future partners’ internal manufacturing facilities and at those of external service providers.

We may engage CMOs that have facilities with a high level of digitization for clinical manufacturing relative to industry standards. While this is meant to improve operational efficiency, this may pose additional risk of process equipment malfunction and even overall manufacturing system failure or shutdown due to internal or external factors including, but not limited to, design issues, system compatibility or potential cybersecurity breaches. This may lead to delay in supply or shutdown of our CMOs or our future partners facilities. Any disruption in our CMOs or our future partners’ manufacturing capabilities could cause delays in production capacity for drug substances or drug products, impose additional costs, or may require us to identify, qualify and establish relationships with additional CMOs with alternative manufacturing sites, the occurrence of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

As the development and commercial capacity for our or our future partners’ product candidates and products expand, we and/or our future partners may need to establish additional manufacturing capabilities and expand to other locations or geographies, which may lead to regulatory delays or prove costly. If we or our future partners fail to select the correct location, complete the construction in an efficient manner, recruit the required personnel, and generally manage our growth effectively, the development and production of our product candidates could be delayed or curtailed. Additional investments may be needed if changes in our manufacturing process lead to required changes in our infrastructure.

Certain of our product candidates rely on the availability of specialty raw materials, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all.

Certain of our product candidates require specialty raw materials, some of which are manufactured by small companies with limited resources and experience to support a commercial product, and the suppliers may not be able to deliver raw materials to our specifications. These suppliers may be ill-equipped to support our needs, especially in non-routine circumstances like an FDA inspection or medical crisis, such as widespread contamination. We also do not have contracts with many of these suppliers, and we may not be able to contract with them on acceptable terms or at all. Accordingly, we may in the future experience delays in receiving key raw materials to support clinical or commercial manufacturing.

In addition, some raw materials are currently available from a single supplier, or a small number of suppliers. We cannot be sure that these suppliers will remain in business or that they will not be purchased by one of our competitors or another company that is not interested in continuing to produce these materials for our intended purpose. In addition, the lead time needed to establish a relationship with a new supplier can be lengthy, and we may experience delays in meeting demand in the event we must switch to a new supplier. The time and effort to qualify a new supplier could result in additional costs, diversion of resources or reduced manufacturing yields, any of which would negatively impact our operating results. Further, we may be unable to enter into agreements with a new supplier on commercially reasonable terms, which could have a material adverse impact on our business.

Our product candidates are inherently sensitive to shipping and storage conditions and could be subject to risk of loss or damage.

Our product candidates are sensitive to temperature, storage and handling conditions. Loss in product candidates could occur if the product or product intermediates are not stored or handled properly. Shelf life for our product candidates may vary by product and is not fully quantified and is expected to be variable, and it is possible that our product candidates could be lost due to expiration prior to use. This has in the past led and could in the future lead to additional manufacturing costs and delays in our ability to supply required quantities for clinical trials or otherwise.

We are subject to significant regulatory oversight with respect to identification and manufacturing our product candidates. We do not have our own manufacturing facilities and relay on third party manufacturers to manufacturer our product candidates. The manufacturing facilities of our third-party manufacturers or suppliers may not meet regulatory requirements. Failure to meet cGMP requirements set forth in regulations promulgated by the FDA, the EMA, the TGA and other comparable regulatory authorities could result in significant delays in and costs of our products.

The manufacturing of immunotherapies for clinical trials or commercial sale is subject to extensive regulation. cGMP requirements govern manufacturing processes and procedures, including record-keeping, and the implementation and operation of quality systems to control and assure the quality of products and materials used in clinical trials. We do not have our own manufacturing facilities and rely on third party CMOs to manufacturer our product candidates. The manufacturing facilities of our third-party CMOs or suppliers may not meet regulatory requirements. Failure to meet cGMP requirements set forth in regulations promulgated by the FDA, the EMA, the TGA and other comparable regulatory authorities could result in significant delays in and costs of our product candidates.

Poor control of the cGMP production processes can lead to product quality failures that can impact our ability to supply product, resulting in cost overruns and delays to clinical timelines, which could be extensive. Such production process issues include but are not limited to:

All necessary documentation in support of clinical trials as well as a BLA or other marketing authorization application must be provided on a timely basis and must adhere to the FDA’s, the EMA’s, the TGA’s and other countries’ cGMP or other quality assurance requirements which are enforced, in the case of the FDA, in part through its facility inspection program.

Regulatory authorities typically require representative manufacturing site inspections to assess adequate compliance with cGMPs and manufacturing controls as described in the filing. If one of our third-party manufacturing sites fails to provide sufficient quality assurance or control, approval to initiate clinical trials or to commercialize our product candidates may not be granted. Inspections by

regulatory authorities may occur at any time during the development or commercialization phase of products. The inspections may be product-specific or facility-specific for broader cGMP inspections or as a follow up to development or market issues that the regulatory agency may identify. Deficient inspection outcomes may negatively affect the ability of our third-party CMOs or suppliers to fulfill their supply obligations, impacting or delaying supply or delaying the development of one or more of our product candidates.

The manufacturing process for any products that we may develop is subject to the FDA’s, the EMA’s, the TGA’s and other regulatory authorities’ approval processes, and we may need to contract with manufacturers who we believe can meet applicable regulatory authority requirements on an ongoing basis. If our third-party CMOs are not able to reliably produce product candidates to specifications acceptable to the FDA, the EMA, the TGA’s or other regulatory authorities, we or our future partners may not obtain or maintain the approvals we or they need for our clinical trials or to commercialize such product candidates. Even if our future partners obtain regulatory approval for any of our immunotherapies, there is no assurance that either our CMOs or our future partners will be able to manufacture our product candidates to specifications acceptable to the FDA, EMA, TGA or other regulatory authorities, to produce it in sufficient quantities to meet the requirements for the potential launch of the product, or to meet potential future demand. Any of these challenges could delay completion of clinical trials, require bridging clinical trials or the repetition of one or more clinical trials, increase clinical trial costs, delay approval of our product candidates, impair commercialization efforts or increase our cost of goods. The occurrence of any of the foregoing could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

In addition, we may not have direct control over the ability of our CMOs or our future partners to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel. Furthermore, our CMOs may be engaged with other companies to supply or manufacture materials or products for such companies, which exposes our CMOs to regulatory risks for the production of such materials and products. As a result, failure to meet the regulatory requirements for the production of those materials and products may generally affect the regulatory status of our CMOs’ facilities. Our future partners’ failure, or the failure of our third-party CMOs, 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, license revocation, 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 and product candidates (including those of our future partners) and our overall business operations. Our future dependence upon others for the manufacture of our product candidates and raw materials may adversely affect our future profit margins and our ability to conduct our clinical trials and the ability of our future partners to commercialize any products that receive regulatory approval on a timely and competitive basis.

The FDA, EMA, TGA and other regulatory authorities may require our future partners to submit product samples of any lot of any approved product together with the protocols showing the results of applicable tests at any time. Under some circumstances, the FDA, the EMA, the TGA or other regulatory authorities may require that our future partners do not distribute a lot or lots until the relevant agency authorizes such release. Deviations in the manufacturing process, including those affecting quality attributes and stability, may result in unacceptable changes in the product that could result in lot failures or product recalls. Our third-party CMOs may have, in the past, experienced lot failures and some may have experienced product recalls. Lot failures or product recalls with respect to product produced by either our future partners’ own facilities or those of our third-party CMOs could cause us and our future partners to delay clinical trials or product launches, which could be costly to us and otherwise harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Our future partners and our third-party CMOs also may encounter problems hiring and retaining the experienced scientific, quality-control and manufacturing personnel needed to operate our manufacturing processes and operations, which could result in delays in production or difficulties in maintaining compliance with applicable regulatory requirements. While we will train and qualify all personnel around the appropriate handling of our product candidates and materials, we may not be able to control for or ultimately detect intentional sabotage or negligence by any of our employees, the employees of our future partners or any contractor.

Risks Related to the Commercialization of our Pipeline

We will rely on our future partners to further develop our product candidates in late-stage clinical trials and to commercialize our product candidates if regulatory approval is obtained. The successful commercialization of our product candidates by our future partners will depend in part on the extent to which governmental authorities, private health insurers and other third-party payors provide coverage and adequate reimbursement levels and implement pricing policies favorable for our product candidates. Failure to obtain or maintain coverage and adequate reimbursement for our product candidates, if approved, could limit our partners’ ability to market those products and thereby decrease our ability to generate revenue.

We will rely on our future partners to develop our product candidates in late-stage clinical trials and to commercialize our product candidates if regulatory approval is obtained. The availability and extent of reimbursement by governmental and private payors is essential for most patients to be able to afford expensive treatments such as the medicines that we and our future partners hope to develop and sell. In addition, because several of our product candidates represent new approaches to the treatment of cancer, we and/or our future partners cannot accurately estimate how these products would be priced, whether reimbursement could be obtained, or any potential revenue. Sales of our product candidates will depend substantially, both domestically and in other countries, on the extent to which the costs of our product candidates will be paid by health maintenance, managed care, pharmacy benefit, and similar healthcare management organizations, or reimbursed by government health administration authorities, private health coverage insurers and other third-party payors. If reimbursement is not available, or is available only to limited levels, our future partners may not be able to successfully commercialize our product candidates. Even if coverage is provided, the approved reimbursement amount may not be high enough to allow our future partners to establish or maintain pricing sufficient to realize a sufficient return on our investment in any of our products.

There is significant uncertainty related to the insurance coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products, including genetic medicines. In the United States, the principal decisions about reimbursement for new medicines are typically made by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, an agency within the United States Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, as CMS decides whether and to what extent a new medicine will be covered and reimbursed under Medicare. Private payors tend to follow CMS to a substantial degree. It is difficult to predict what CMS will decide with respect to reimbursement for novel products such as ours. Reimbursement agencies in Europe may be more conservative than CMS. For example, a number of cancer drugs have been approved for reimbursement in the United States but have not been approved for reimbursement in certain European countries.

Outside the United States, certain countries, including a number of member states of the European Union and Australia, set prices and reimbursement for pharmaceutical products, with limited participation from the marketing authorization holders. We cannot be sure that such prices and reimbursement will be acceptable to us or our partners. If the regulatory authorities in these jurisdictions set prices or reimbursement levels that are not commercially attractive for our future partners, our revenues from sales by our future partners, and the potential profitability of our drug products, in those countries would be negatively affected. An increasing number of countries are taking initiatives to attempt to reduce large budget deficits by focusing cost-cutting efforts on pharmaceuticals for their state-run health care systems. These international price control efforts have impacted all regions of the world but have been most drastic in the European Union. In the European Union, changes to pricing and reimbursement are almost exclusively a matter for national, and not European Union, law and policy. Additionally, some countries require approval of the sale price of a product before it can be marketed. In many countries, the pricing review period begins after marketing or product licensing approval is granted. As a result, our future partners might obtain marketing approval for a product in a particular country, but then may experience delays in the reimbursement approval of such product or be subject to price regulations that would delay our partners’ commercial launch of the product, possibly for lengthy time periods, which could negatively impact the revenues we are able to generate from the sale of the product in that particular country.

Moreover, increasing efforts by governmental and third-party payors, in the United States and in other countries, to cap or reduce healthcare costs may cause such organizations to limit both coverage and level of reimbursement for new products approved and, as a result, they may not cover or provide adequate payment for our product candidates. For example, the United States government recently released a “blueprint,” which is a plan to reduce the cost of drugs. The blueprint contains certain measures that the HHS is already working to implement. At the state level, legislatures are increasingly passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access, and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.

We expect that our future partners will experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of any of our product candidates, 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 in the marketplace.

We face significant competition in an environment of rapid technological and scientific change, and our failure to effectively compete would prevent us from achieving our goals. Most of our competitors have significantly greater resources than we do, and we may not be able to compete successfully.

The pharmaceutical market is intensely competitive and rapidly changing. Many large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic institutions, governmental agencies, and other public and private research organizations are pursuing the development of novel drugs for the same diseases that we are targeting or expect to target. Many of our competitors have:

Our product candidates may face intense competition from drugs that have already been approved and accepted by the medical community for the treatment of the conditions for which drugs developed from our product candidates are designed to be address. We also expect that our product candidates will face competition from new drugs that enter the market. There are a number of drugs currently under development, which may become commercially available in the future, for the treatment of conditions for which we and our future partners are trying, or may in the future try, to develop drugs. These drugs may be more effective, safer, less expensive, or marketed and sold more effectively, than any products developed using our technologies.

We anticipate competing with the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world, many of which are all currently conducting research in the fields of immuno-oncology and infectious diseases. These companies have significantly greater financial and human resources than we currently have. In addition to these large pharmaceutical companies, we may directly compete with fully integrated biopharmaceutical companies and other immunotherapy-focused oncology companies, as well as a number of companies focused on immunotherapies, some of which have entered into collaboration and funding agreements with larger pharmaceutical or biotechnology companies.

If we successfully develop product candidates, and our future partners obtain approval for them, we and our future partners will face competition based on many different factors, including:

Our and our partners’ competitors may develop or commercialize products with significant advantages over any products we or our future partners develop based on any of the factors listed above or on other factors. In addition, our competitors may develop collaborations with or receive funding from larger pharmaceutical or biotechnology companies, providing them with an advantage over us. Our competitors may therefore be more successful in commercializing their products than our future partners are, which could adversely affect our competitive position and business. Competitive products may make any products our future partners develop using our technologies obsolete or noncompetitive before we and our future partners can recover the expenses of developing and commercializing our products, if approved.

The market opportunities for certain of our product candidates may be limited due to the rarity of the disease or limited to those patients who are ineligible for or have failed prior treatments, and may be small. As the target patient populations for some of our programs are small, we must be able to successfully identify trial participants and achieve a significant market share to maintain profitability and growth.

The FDA often approves new cancer immunotherapies initially only for use by patients with relapsed or refractory advanced cancer, or new bacterial vaccines initially only for use by patients with certain advanced diseases. We expect our future partners will initially seek approval of certain of our product candidates in this context. Subsequently, for those product candidates that prove to be sufficiently beneficial, if any, we would expect our future partners to seek approval in earlier lines of treatment and potentially as a first-line therapy but there is no guarantee that our product candidates, even if approved, would be approved for earlier lines of therapy, and, prior to any such approvals, we and/or our future partners may have to conduct additional clinical trials. In the future, we may also develop product candidates for the treatment of rare diseases.

Our projections of the number of people who have or will have the diseases we may be targeting may prove to be incorrect. Further, new studies may change the estimated incidence or prevalence of these diseases. The number of trial participants may turn out to be lower than expected. Additionally, the potentially addressable patient population for our product candidates may be limited or may not be amenable to treatment with our product candidates. Even if for our product candidate, if approved, obtain significant market share, because the potential target populations are small, we may never achieve profitability without obtaining regulatory approval for additional indications.

We do not intend to establish marketing and sales organization and as a company, we have no experience in marketing pharmaceutical products. We will rely on the marketing and sales capabilities of our future partners and other third parties, which may not be able to market and sell our product candidates effectively in the United States and other jurisdictions, if approved, or generate product sales revenue.

Given our stage of development, we have no sales, distribution or marketing capabilities, and we have not designed our pre-clinical studies and clinical trials with specific commercialization or marketing considerations in mind. We do not intend to establish marketing and sales organization and as a company, we have no experience in marketing pharmaceutical products. We will rely on the marketing and sales capabilities of our future partners and other third parties to commercialize any products that may result from our development programs in the United States, Europe and other regions. We intend to enter into collaborations with other entities to utilize their mature marketing and distribution capabilities, but we may be unable to enter into such collaboration agreements on favorable terms, if at all. If our future partners do not commit sufficient resources to commercialize products developed using our technologies, if any, product sales revenue may not be generated in amounts sufficient to sustain our business. We will be competing with many companies that currently have extensive and well-funded marketing and sales operations. Without the support of a third party to perform marketing and sales functions, we may be unable to compete successfully against these more established companies.

Our future profitability, if any, depends in part on our partners’ ability to penetrate global markets, where they may be subject to additional regulatory burdens and other risks and uncertainties associated with international operations that could materially adversely affect our business.

Our future profitability, if any, will depend in part on the ability of our future partners to commercialize any products that our future partners may develop in markets throughout the world. Commercialization of products in various markets could subject us to risks and uncertainties, including:

Our future partners may have limited experience in these areas. Failure to successfully navigate these risks and uncertainties may limit or prevent market penetration for any products that our future partners may develop using our technologies, which would limit their commercial potential and our revenues.

Even if our future partners obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, the products may not gain the market acceptance among physicians, patients, hospitals, cancer treatment centers and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success.

Even with the requisite approvals, the commercial success of products using our technologies will depend in part on the medical community, patients, and third-party or governmental payors accepting immunotherapies in general, and such products in particular, as medically useful, cost-effective and safe. Any product developed using our technologies that our future partners bring to the market may not gain market acceptance by physicians, trial participants, third-party payors, and others in the medical community. Additionally, ethical, social and legal concerns about genetic research could result in additional regulations restricting or prohibiting the products and processes we may use. If these products do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance, our future partners may not generate significant product sales revenue and may not become profitable, which could adversely affect our business operations and financial condition. The degree of market acceptance of products derived from our product candidates, if approved for commercial sale, will depend on a number of factors, including:

Even if a potential product displays a favorable efficacy and safety profile in pre-clinical studies and clinical trials, market acceptance of the product will not be known until after it is launched. Our and our partners’ efforts to educate the medical community and third-party payors on the benefits of the products may require significant resources and may never be successful. Our and our partners’ efforts to educate the marketplace may require more resources than are required by the conventional technologies marketed by our competitors due to the complexity and uniqueness of our programs.

Commercial success of any approved products will also depend in large part on the availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors, including government payors such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs and entry into managed care organizations, which may be affected by existing and future healthcare reform measures designed to reduce the cost of healthcare. Third-party payors could require us to conduct additional studies, including post-marketing studies related to the cost effectiveness of a product, to qualify for reimbursement, which could be costly and divert our resources. If government and other healthcare payors do not provide adequate coverage and reimbursement levels for any of products derived from our product candidates once approved, whether due to healthcare reform legislation or otherwise, market acceptance and commercial success would be reduced.

In addition, if any of products derived from our product candidates are approved for marketing, we and/or our future partners will be subject to significant regulatory obligations regarding the submission of safety and other post-marketing information and reports for such product, and will need to continue to comply (or ensure that our third-party providers comply) with cGMP and current good clinical practices, or GCP, for any clinical trials that we or our future partners conduct post-approval. In addition, there is always the risk that we or a partner or regulatory authority might identify previously unknown problems with a product post-approval, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency. Compliance with these requirements is costly, and any such failure to comply or other issues with products derived from our product candidates identified post-approval could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Coverage and reimbursement may be limited or unavailable in certain market segments for our product candidates, which could make it difficult for our future partners to sell products derived from our product candidates, if approved, profitably.

Successful sales of our product candidates, if approved, depend on the availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors including governmental healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, managed care organizations and commercial payors, among others. Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of any product candidates for which regulatory approval is obtained. In addition, because our product candidates represent new approaches to the treatment of cancer and prevention of infectious diseases, we cannot accurately estimate the potential revenue from our product candidates.

Patients who are provided medical treatment for their conditions generally rely on third-party payors to reimburse all or part of the costs associated with their treatment. Obtaining coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors is critical to new product acceptance.

Third-party payors decide which drugs and treatments they will cover and the amount of reimbursement. Reimbursement by a third-party payor may depend upon a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the third-party payor’s determination that use of a product is:

Obtaining coverage and reimbursement of a product from a government or other third-party payor is a time-consuming and costly process that could require us to provide to the payor supporting scientific, clinical and cost-effectiveness data for the use of products derived from our product candidates. Even if coverage for a given product is obtained, if the resulting reimbursement rates are insufficient, hospitals may not approve the product for use in their facility or third-party payors may require co-payments that patients find unacceptably high. Patients are unlikely to use products derived from our product candidates unless coverage is provided, and reimbursement is adequate to cover a significant portion of the cost of such products. Separate reimbursement for the product itself may or may not be available. Instead, the hospital or administering physician may be reimbursed only for providing the treatment or procedure in which the product is used. Further, from time to time, CMS revises the reimbursement systems used to reimburse health care providers, including the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule and Outpatient Prospective Payment System, which may result in reduced Medicare payments. In some cases, private third-party payors rely on all or portions of Medicare payment systems to determine payment rates. Changes to government healthcare programs that reduce payments under these programs may negatively impact payments from private third-party payors and reduce the willingness of physicians to use our product candidates.

In the United States, no uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement for products exists among third-party payors. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for products can differ significantly from payor to payor. Further, one payor’s determination to provide coverage for a product does not assure that other payors will also provide coverage for the product. Adequate third-party reimbursement may not be available to enable us to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development.

We expect that our future partners will seek approval to market products derived from our product candidates in the United States, the European Union, Australia and other selected jurisdictions. If approval for a product in any particular jurisdiction, our future partners will be subject to rules and regulations in that jurisdiction. In some countries, particularly those in Europe and Australia, the pricing of biologics is subject to governmental control. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after obtaining marketing approval of a product candidate. Some of these countries may require the completion of clinical trials that compare the cost-effectiveness of a particular product candidate to currently available therapies. Other member states allow companies to fix their own prices for medicines but monitor and control company profits. The downward pressure on health care costs has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products into the marketplace. In addition, in some countries, cross-border imports from low-priced markets exert a commercial pressure on pricing within a country.

The marketability of any product derived from our product candidates which receives regulatory approval for commercial sale may suffer if government and other third-party payors fail to provide coverage and adequate reimbursement. We expect downward pressure on pharmaceutical pricing to continue. Further, coverage policies and third-party reimbursement rates may change at any time. Even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for one or more products which receives regulatory approval, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future.

Enacted and future legislation may increase the difficulty and cost for us or our future partners to obtain marketing approval of and commercialize any products derived from our product candidates and affect the prices we may charge for such products.

The United States and many foreign jurisdictions have enacted or proposed legislative and regulatory changes affecting the healthcare system that could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability to profitably sell any product for which we obtain marketing approval.

In March 2010, the ACA was enacted, which substantially changes the way health care is financed by both governmental and private insurers, and significantly impacts the United States pharmaceutical industry. The ACA, among other things, increased the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and extended the rebate program to individuals enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations, established annual fees and taxes on manufacturers of certain branded prescription drugs, and promoted a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program. Considerable uncertainty remains regarding the implementation and impact of the ACA.

Since its enactment, there have been and there remain executive, judicial and congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. As a result, there have been delays in the implementation of, and action taken to repeal or replace, certain aspects of the ACA. Since January 2017, former President Trump has signed two Executive Orders designed to delay the implementation of certain provisions of the ACA or otherwise circumvent some of the requirements for health insurance mandated by the ACA. On January 20, 2017, former President Trump signed the first Executive Order, directing federal agencies with authorities and responsibilities under the ACA to waive, defer, grant exemptions from, or delay the implementation of any provision of the ACA that would impose a fiscal burden on states or a cost, fee, tax, penalty or regulatory burden on individuals, healthcare providers, health insurers, or manufacturers of pharmaceuticals or medical devices. On October 13, 2017, former President Trump signed the second Executive Order terminating the cost-sharing subsidies (CSRs), that reimburse insurers under the ACA. On August 14, 2020, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled in two separate cases that the federal government is liable for the full amount of unpaid CSRs for the years preceding and including 2017. For CSR claims made by health insurance companies for years 2018 and later, further litigation will be required to determine the amounts due, if any. Payments are expected to increase premiums on certain policies issued by qualified health plans under the ACA. Further, on June 14, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that the federal government was not required to pay to third-party payors more than $12 billion in ACA risk corridor payments that they argued were owed to them. This decision was appealed to the United States Supreme Court, which on April 27, 2020, reversed the decision, concluding the government has an obligation to pay these risk corridor payments under the relevant formula. It is not clear what effect this result will have on our business, but we will continue to monitor any developments. While Congress has not passed comprehensive repeal legislation to date, it has enacted laws that modify certain provisions of the ACA such as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA), which decreased the “individual mandate” to $0. On December 14, 2018, a Texas United States District Court Judge ruled that the ACA is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed. On June 17, 2021, the United States Supreme Court dismissed this case. It is unclear how the Supreme Court’s decision will impact the ACA and our business. There is significant uncertainty regarding the future of the ACA and its impact on our business and operations. We continue to evaluate the effect that the ACA and its possible repeal and replacement has on our business.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. For example, in August 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011 was signed into law, which, among other things, included aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of, on average, 2% per fiscal year through 2030, with the exception of a temporary suspension from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021, unless Congress takes additional action. Proposed legislation, if passed, would extend this suspension until the end of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Recently, there has been increasing legislative and enforcement interest in the United States with respect to specialty drug pricing practices. Specifically, there have been several recent United States congressional inquiries and legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, reduce the cost of prescription drugs under Medicare, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. At the federal level, the United States Presidential administration’s budget proposal for the fiscal year 2021 includes a $135 billion allowance to support legislative proposals seeking to reduce drug prices, increase competition, lower out-of-pocket drug costs for patients, and increase patient access to lower-cost generic and biosimilar drugs. On March 10, 2020, the Trump administration sent “principles” for drug pricing to Congress, calling for legislation that would, among other things, cap Medicare Part D beneficiary out-of-pocket pharmacy expenses, provide an option to cap Medicare Part D beneficiary monthly out-of-pocket expenses, and place limits on pharmaceutical price increases. Further, the Trump administration previously released a “Blueprint” to lower drug prices and reduce out of pocket costs of drugs that contained proposals to increase drug manufacturer competition, increase the negotiating power of certain federal healthcare programs, incentivize manufacturers to lower the list price of their products, and reduce the out of pocket costs of drug products paid by consumers. HHS has solicited feedback on some of these measures and has implemented others under its existing authority. For example, in May 2019, CMS issued a final rule that amends the Medicare Advantage and Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit regulations to reduce out of pocket costs for plan enrollees and allow Medicare plans to negotiate lower rates for certain drugs. Among other things, the final rule now allows Medicare Advantage plans the option to use step therapy, a type of pre-authorization, for Part B drugs beginning January 1, 2020. This final rule codified CMS’s policy change that was effective January 1, 2019. In addition, there have been several changes to the 340B drug pricing program, which imposes ceilings on prices that drug manufacturers can charge for medications sold to certain healthcare facilities. Some of these changes are undergoing legal challenges, and their status is currently in question. It is unclear how these developments could affect covered hospitals who might purchase our future products and affect the rates we may charge such facilities for our approved products in the future, if any.

Additionally, on July 24, 2020 and September 13, 2020, the Trump administration announced several executive orders related to prescription drug pricing that attempt to implement several of the administration’s proposals. As a result, the FDA released a final rule on September 24, 2020, effective November 30, 2020, providing guidance for states to build and submit importation plans for drugs from Canada. Further, on November 20, 2020, HHS finalized a regulation removing safe harbor protection for price reductions from pharmaceutical manufacturers to plan sponsors under Part D, either directly or through pharmacy benefit managers, unless the price reduction is required by law. The rule also creates a new safe harbor for price reductions reflected at the point-of-sale, as well as a safe harbor for certain fixed fee arrangements between pharmacy benefit managers and manufacturers. On November 20, 2020, CMS issued an interim final rule implementing Former President Trump’s Most Favored Nation executive order, which would tie Medicare Part B payments for certain physician-administered drugs to the lowest price paid in other economically advanced countries, effective January 1, 2021. On December 28, 2020, the United States District Court in Northern California issued a nationwide preliminary injunction against the implementation of the interim final rule. Although a number of these executive orders and other proposed measures will require authorization through additional legislation to become effective, and the Biden administration may reverse or otherwise change these measures, we expect that Congress will continue to seek new legislative 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 payers. At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control costs of pharmaceutical and biological products. Moreover, 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.

In the United States and in some other jurisdictions, there have been a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the health care system that could prevent or delay marketing approval of our drug or biologic candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities, or affect our ability to profitably sell any drug or biologic candidates for which we obtain marketing approval, if any. Further, increased scrutiny by the United States Congress of the FDA’s approval process for drugs and biological products may significantly delay or prevent marketing approval, as well as subject us to more stringent product labeling and post-marketing testing and other requirements. There also are a number of state and local legislative and regulatory efforts related to drug or biologic pricing, including drug or biologic price transparency laws that apply to pharmaceutical manufacturers, that may have an impact on our business.

In addition, the Drug Supply Chain Security Act enacted in 2013 imposes new obligations on manufacturers of pharmaceutical products related to product tracking and tracing, and that law is expected to be fully implemented over a ten-year period. Most recently, on December 20, 2019, former President Trump signed the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act for 2020 into law (P.L. 116-94) that includes a piece of bipartisan legislation called the Creating and Restoring Equal Access to Equivalent Samples Act of 2019 or the “CREATES Act.” The CREATES Act aims to address the concern articulated by both the FDA and others in the industry that some brand manufacturers have improperly restricted the distribution of their products, including by invoking the existence of a REMS for certain products, to deny generic and biosimilar product developers access to samples of brand products. The CREATES Act establishes a private cause of action that permits a generic or biosimilar product developer to sue the brand manufacturer to compel it to furnish the necessary samples on “commercially reasonable, market-based terms.” Whether and how generic and biosimilar product developments will use this new pathway, as well as the likely outcome of any legal challenges to provisions of the CREATES Act, remain highly uncertain and its potential effects on our future commercial products are unknown. Other legislative and regulatory proposals have been made to expand post-approval requirements and restrict sales and promotional activities for pharmaceutical or biological products. We cannot be sure whether additional legislative changes will be enacted, or whether FDA regulations, guidance or interpretations will be changed, or what the impact of such changes on the marketing approvals, if any, of our drug or biologic candidates, may be or whether such changes will have any other impacts on our business. In addition, increased scrutiny by the United States Congress of the FDA’s approval process may significantly delay or prevent marketing approval, as well as subject us to more stringent product labeling and post-marketing conditions and other requirements.

We expect that the healthcare reform measures that have been adopted, and that may be adopted in the future, may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product and could seriously harm our future revenues. 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 products. Further, it is possible that additional governmental action is taken in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

In the European Union, similar political, economic and regulatory developments may affect our ability to profitably commercialize products derived from our product candidates. In addition to continuing pressure on prices and cost containment measures, legislative developments at the European Union member state level may result in significant additional requirements or obstacles that may increase our operating costs.

The delivery of healthcare in the European Union, including the establishment and operation of health services and the pricing and reimbursement of medicines, is almost exclusively a matter for national, rather than European Union, law and policy. National governments and health service providers have different priorities and approaches to the delivery of health care and the pricing and reimbursement of products in that context. In general, however, the healthcare budgetary constraints in most European Union member states have resulted in restrictions on the pricing and reimbursement of medicines by relevant health service providers. Coupled with ever-increasing European Union and national regulatory burdens on those wishing to develop and market products derived from our product candidates, this could prevent or delay marketing approval of products derived from our product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities, and affect our or our future partners’ ability to commercialize any products derived from our product candidates for which we or they obtain marketing approval.

We expect that additional healthcare reform measures or proposals will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for products derived from our product candidates or additional pricing pressures. In the event that the pricing structures for healthcare products, such as the product candidates we are developing, change materially and limit payments for such product candidates, our business will be adversely impacted as any products derived from our product candidates may no longer be commercially viable based on their expected net present value; we may have invested significant resources in product candidates that cannot be commercially developed; or we may determine that assets that have reached an early phase of development cannot or will not be taken into further development, notwithstanding their clinical viability. In addition, development assets or clinical programs that are part of our collaborations may no longer be deemed commercially viable to pursue based on our partners’ assessments of the impact of any proposed, announced, or legislated pricing reforms

We cannot predict what healthcare reform initiatives may be adopted in the future. Our product candidates from PIONEER may be issued with PD-1 or PD-L1 inhibitors and as a result become too expensive for government, or commercial payors coverage and as a result may reduce our potential market. Further legislative and regulatory developments are likely, and we expect ongoing initiatives to increase pressure on drug pricing. Such reforms could have an adverse effect on anticipated revenues from products derived from our product candidates that we may successfully develop and for which we or our future partners may obtain regulatory approval and may affect our overall financial condition and ability to develop product candidates.

European Union drug marketing and reimbursement regulations may materially affect our partners’ ability to market and receive coverage for products derived from our product candidates in the European Union member states.

We expect that our future partners will have to seek approval to market products derived from our product candidates in the United States and in other selected jurisdictions. If our future partners obtain approval for products derived from our product candidates in a particular jurisdiction, they will be subject to rules and regulations in that jurisdiction. In some countries, particularly those in the European Union, the pricing of biologics is subject to governmental control and other market regulations that could put pressure on the pricing and usage of products derived from our product candidates. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after obtaining marketing approval of a product candidate. In addition, market acceptance and sales of products derived from our product candidates will depend significantly on the availability of adequate coverage and reimbursement from third-party payors for any such product and may be affected by existing and future healthcare reform measures.

In addition, in most countries outside the United States, the proposed pricing for a drug must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. The requirements governing drug pricing and reimbursement vary widely from country to country. For example, the European Union provides options for its member states to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. Reference pricing used by various European Union member states and parallel distribution, or arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced member states, can further reduce prices. A member state may approve a specific price for the medicinal product, or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market. In some countries, we and/or our future partners may be required to conduct a clinical trial or other studies that compare the cost-effectiveness of any of our product candidates to other available therapies in order to obtain or maintain reimbursement or pricing approval. There can be no assurance that any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for pharmaceutical products will allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements for any of our products. Historically, products launched in the European Union do not follow price structures of the United States and, generally, prices tend to be significantly lower in the European Union. Publication of discounts by third-party payors or authorities may lead to further pressure on the prices or reimbursement levels within the country of publication and other countries. If pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels or if reimbursement of our products is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, our revenues from sales by us or our future partners and the potential profitability of any of our product candidates in those countries would be negatively affected.

Risks Related to our Reliance on Third Parties

We will rely on third parties in the conduct of significant aspects of our pre-clinical studies and clinical trials and intend to rely on third parties in the conduct of future clinical trials. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements or fail to meet expected deadlines, regulatory approval for our product candidates may not be obtained.

We currently rely and expect to continue to rely on third parties, such as CROs, clinical data management organizations, future partners, medical institutions and clinical investigators, to conduct various and significant elements of our clinical trials. We currently rely and expect to continue to rely on third parties to conduct certain research and pre-clinical testing activities. In some cases, these third parties may terminate their engagements with us. If we need to enter into alternative arrangements, it would delay our discovery or product development activities.

Our reliance on these third parties for research and development activities will reduce our control over these activities but will not relieve us of our regulatory or contractual responsibilities. We will be responsible for ensuring that each of our pre-clinical studies and clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal and regulatory requirements and scientific standards. For example, we will remain responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the general investigational plan and protocols for the trial.

Moreover, the FDA requires us to comply with Good Clinical Practice, or GCP, for conducting, recording and reporting the results of clinical trials to assure that data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of trial participants are protected. We also are required to register ongoing clinical trials and post the results of completed clinical trials on a government-sponsored database, ClinicalTrials.gov, within certain timeframes. Failure to do so can result in fines, adverse publicity, and civil and criminal sanctions. For any violations of laws and regulations during the conduct of our pre-clinical studies and clinical trials, we could be subject to warning letters or enforcement action that may include civil penalties up to and including criminal prosecution.

We and our CROs will be required to comply with regulations, including GCP, for conducting, monitoring, recording and reporting the results of pre-clinical studies and clinical trials to ensure that the data and results are scientifically credible and accurate and that the trial participants are adequately informed, among other things, of the potential risks of participating in clinical trials. We also are responsible for ensuring that the rights of our clinical trial participants are protected. These regulations are enforced by the FDA, the competent authorities of the member states, and comparable regulatory authorities of other jurisdictions for any product candidates in clinical development. The FDA enforces GCP regulations through periodic inspections of clinical trial sponsors, principal investigators and trial sites. If we or our CROs fail to comply with applicable GCP, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or comparable regulatory authorities of other jurisdictions may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that, upon inspection, the FDA will determine that any of our future clinical trials will comply with GCP. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product candidates produced in accordance with the requirements of cGMP regulations. Our failure or the failure of our CROs or CMOs to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process and could also subject us to enforcement action.

Although we intend to design the clinical trials for certain of our product candidates, our future partners may design the clinical trials that they are managing (in some cases, with our input) and in the case of clinical trials controlled by us, we expect that CROs will conduct all of the clinical trials. As a result, many important aspects of our development programs, including their conduct and timing, will be outside of our direct control. Our reliance on third parties to conduct future pre-clinical studies and clinical trials will also result in less direct control over the management of data developed through pre-clinical studies and clinical trials than would be the case if we were relying entirely upon our own staff. Communicating with outside parties can also potentially lead to mistakes as well as difficulties in coordinating activities. Outside parties may:

These factors may materially adversely affect the willingness or ability of third parties to conduct our pre-clinical studies and clinical trials and may subject us to unexpected cost increases that are beyond our control. If the CROs do not perform pre-clinical studies and clinical trials in a satisfactory manner, breach their obligations to us or fail to comply with regulatory requirements, the development, regulatory approval and commercialization of our product candidates may be delayed, our future partners may not be able to obtain regulatory approval and commercialize products derived from our product candidates, or our development programs may be materially and irreversibly harmed. If we are unable to rely on pre-clinical and clinical data collected by our CROs, we could be required to repeat, extend the duration of, or increase the size of any clinical trials we conduct and this could significantly delay the development of our product candidates and/or commercialization of any products derived from our product candidates and could require significantly greater expenditures.

We also expect to rely on other third parties to transport, store and distribute the required materials for our clinical trials. In the past certain of our third-party vendors have mishandled our materials, resulting in loss of full or partial lots of material. Any further performance failure on the part of these third parties could result in damaged products and could delay clinical development or marketing approval of any product candidates we may develop or commercialization of our medicines, if approved, producing additional losses and depriving us of potential product sales revenue, causing us to default on our contractual commitments, result in losses that are not covered by insurance, and damage our reputation and overall perception of our products in the marketplace.

Our existing collaboration, or any future collaboration arrangements or agreements with future partners, if any, that we may enter into, may not be successful, which could significantly limit the likelihood of receiving the potential economic benefits of the collaboration and adversely affect our ability to develop our product candidates and the commercialization of any products derived from our product candidates.

We have entered into a collaboration under which our collaborator may in the future provide funding and other resources for developing our product candidates and potentially commercializing any products derived from our product candidates. We intend to enter into additional collaborations and agreements with future partners, if any, to access additional funding, capabilities and expertise in the future. Our existing collaboration, and any future collaborations or agreements with future partners, if any, we enter into, may pose a number of risks, including the following:

If our collaborations do not result in the successful development of our product candidates or commercialization of products derived from such product candidates, or if one or more of our future partners terminates its agreement with us, we may not receive any future research funding or milestone, earn-out, royalty, or other contingent payments under the collaborations. If we do not receive the funding we expect under these agreements, our development of product candidates could be delayed, and we may need additional resources to develop our product candidates. In addition, in general our future partners have the right to terminate their agreements with us for convenience. If one or more of our future partners terminates its agreement with us, we may find it more difficult to attract new future partners and the perception of us in the business and financial communities could be adversely affected. All of the risks relating to product development, regulatory approval and commercialization described in this Form 20-F apply to the activities of our partners.

Our business is dependent on the successful development, regulatory approval and commercialization of product candidates based on our AI platform technologies. If our future partners, if any, are unable to obtain approval for, and effectively commercialize, our product candidates for the treatment of patients in their intended indications, our business would be significantly harmed.

We believe that the cost and expense of late-stage clinical testing, regulatory approval and commercialization of products for disease indications targeted by our product candidates are beyond the resources of all but the large biopharmaceutical and pharmaceutical companies. Therefore, we intend to develop our product candidates through Phase 2b clinical trials and then enter into partnership arrangements with these large biopharmaceutical and pharmaceutical companies to conduct late-stage clinical trials, regulatory and marketing approval and commercialization of our product candidates. We have not yet entered into any such partnerships and may be unable to do so on economically viable terms, if at all. As a result, late-stage clinical trials as well as pivotal clinical trials for our product candidates have not been commenced and even if such processes are commenced in the near future, it will be several years, if ever, before we or our future partners have a product candidate ready for commercialization. Even if we complete the necessary pre-clinical studies and clinical trials, the marketing approval process is expensive, time-consuming and uncertain, and our future partners may not be able to obtain approvals for the commercialization of any product candidates we may develop. Any immunotherapy we may develop, and the activities associated with its development and commercialization, including design, testing, manufacture, recordkeeping, labeling, storage, approval, advertising, promotion, sale and distribution, are subject to comprehensive regulation by the FDA, the EMA, the TGA and by comparable global health authorities. To obtain the requisite regulatory approvals to commercialize any of our product candidates, we and our future partners must demonstrate through extensive pre-clinical studies and clinical trials that our products are safe and effective, including in the target populations. Successful completion of clinical trials is a prerequisite to submitting a biologics license application, or BLA, or a NDA to the FDA, a Marketing Authorization Application, or EMAA, to the EMA, a Marketing Authorization Application to the TGA, or AMAA and similar marketing applications to comparable global regulatory authorities, for each product candidate and, consequently, the ultimate approval and commercial marketing of any product candidates.

Failure to obtain marketing approval for a product candidate will prevent our future partners from commercializing the product candidate in a given jurisdiction. Neither we nor our future partners have received approval to market any of our product candidates from regulatory authorities in any jurisdiction, and it is possible that none of our product candidates, or any product candidates we may seek to develop in the future, will ever obtain regulatory approval. We have limited experience in filing and supporting the applications necessary to gain marketing approvals and intend to rely on our future partners to conduct this process. To our knowledge, there is no current precedent for an immunotherapy such as the type we are developing being approved for sale by the FDA, the EMA, the TGA or any other regulatory agency elsewhere in the world. Securing regulatory approval requires the submission of extensive pre-clinical and clinical data and supporting information to the various regulatory authorities for each therapeutic indication to establish the product candidate’s safety and efficacy. Securing regulatory approval also requires the submission of information about the product manufacturing process to, and inspection of manufacturing facilities by, the relevant regulatory authority. Any product candidates we or our future partners develop may not be effective, may be only moderately effective, or may prove to have undesirable or unintended side effects, toxicities or other characteristics that may preclude our obtaining marketing approval or prevent or limit commercial use.

The process of obtaining marketing approvals in the United States, the European Union, Australia and elsewhere, is expensive, may take many years if additional clinical trials are required, if approval is obtained at all, and can vary substantially based upon a variety of factors, including the type, complexity and novelty of the product candidates involved. Changes in marketing approval policies during the development period, changes in or the enactment of additional statutes or regulations, or changes in regulatory review for each submitted product application may cause delays in the approval or rejection of an application. The FDA, the EMA, the TGA and comparable authorities in other countries have substantial discretion in the approval process and may refuse to accept any application or may decide that the data are insufficient for approval and require additional pre-clinical, clinical or other trials. In addition, varying interpretations of the data obtained from pre-clinical and clinical testing could delay, limit or prevent marketing approval of a product candidate. Any marketing approval we, or our future partners, ultimately obtain may be limited or subject to restrictions or post-approval commitments that render the approved product not commercially viable. Additional delays, or non-approval if an FDA panel of experts, referred to as an Advisory Committee, or the EMA, the TGA or other regulatory authority recommends non-approval or restrictions on approval. In addition, we and our future partners may experience delays or rejections based upon additional government regulation from future legislation or administrative action, or changes in regulatory agency policy during the period of product development, clinical trials, and the review process.

Regulatory agencies also may approve an immunotherapy for fewer or more limited indications than requested or may grant approval subject to the performance of post-marketing studies. In addition, regulatory agencies may not approve the labeling claims that are necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of our product candidates.

The FDA, the EMA, the TGA and other regulatory agencies review the Chemistry, Manufacturing and Controls, or CMC, section of regulatory filings. Any aspects found unsatisfactory by regulatory agencies may result in delays in clinical trials and commercialization.

In addition, the regulatory agencies typically conduct pre-approval inspections at the time of a BLA, NDA, EMAA, AMAA or comparable filing. Any findings by regulatory agencies and failure to comply with requirements may lead to delay in approval and failure to commercialize the potential product candidate.

If our future partners experience delays in obtaining, or if they fail to obtain, approval of any product candidates we may develop, the commercial prospects for those product candidates will be harmed, and our ability to generate revenues from our collaboration agreements will be materially impaired. Additionally, even if our future partners are successful in obtaining marketing approval for product candidates, because our pre-clinical studies and clinical trials have not been designed with specific commercialization considerations, the commercial prospects for those product candidates could be harmed, and our ability to generate revenues could be materially impaired.

If we are not able to establish collaborations on commercially reasonable terms, we may have to alter our research and development plans.

Our research and product development programs and the potential commercialization of any product candidates we develop alone or with future partners will require substantial additional cash to fund expenses, and we expect that we will continue to seek collaborative arrangements with others in connection with the development and potential commercialization of current and future product candidates or the development of ancillary technologies. We face significant competition in establishing relationships with appropriate partners. In addition, there have been a significant number of recent business combinations among large pharmaceutical companies that have resulted in a reduced number of potential future partners. Whether we reach a definitive agreement for a collaboration will depend, among other things, upon our assessment of the partner’s resources and expertise, the terms and conditions of the proposed collaboration and the proposed partner’s evaluation of a number of factors. Those factors may include, among other things and as applicable for the type of potential product or technology, an assessment of the opportunities and risks of our technology, the design or results of studies or trials, the likelihood of approval, if necessary, of the FDA, the EMA, the TGA or similar regulatory authorities outside the United States, Europe and Australia, the potential market for the subject product candidate, the costs and complexities of manufacturing and delivering such product candidate to patients, the potential of competing products and technologies and industry and market conditions generally.

Current or future partners may also consider alternative product candidates or technologies for similar indications that may be available to collaborate on and whether such a collaboration could be more attractive than the one with us. Additionally, we may be restricted under existing collaboration agreements from entering into future agreements on certain terms or for certain development activities with potential partners. Similarly, our collaboration agreements may contain non-competition provisions that could limit our ability to enter into collaborations with future partners.

Collaborations are complex and time-consuming to negotiate and document. We may not be able to negotiate collaborations on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or at all. If we do enter into additional collaboration agreements, the negotiated terms may force us to relinquish rights that diminish our potential profitability from development and commercialization of the subject product candidates or others. If we are unable to enter into additional collaboration agreements, we may have to curtail the research and development of the product candidate or technology for which we are seeking to collaborate, reduce or delay research and development programs, delay potential commercialization timelines, reduce the scope of any sales or marketing activities or undertake research, development or commercialization activities at our own expense. If we elect to increase our expenditures to fund research, development or commercialization activities on our own, we may need to obtain additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all.

We have entered into in-licensing arrangements and may form or seek to enter into additional licensing arrangements in the future, and we may not realize the benefits of such licensing arrangements.

We may obtain licenses that give us rights to third-party intellectual property, including patents and patent applications that are necessary or useful for our business. In particular, we have entered into license agreements with Statens Serum Institut, or SSI, and PharmaJet, Inc. or PharmaJet to obtain licenses for intellectual property useful in pharmaceutical formulations and delivery devices. We may enter into additional licenses to third-party intellectual property in the future.

The success of products developed based on in-licensed technology will depend in part on the ability of our current and future licensors to prosecute, obtain, maintain, protect, enforce and defend patent protection for our in-licensed intellectual property. Our current and future licensors may not successfully prosecute any patent applications we may license. Even if patents were issued in respect of these patent applications, our licensors may fail to maintain these patents, may determine not to pursue litigation against other companies that are infringing these patents, or may pursue such litigation less aggressively than we would. Without protection for the intellectual property we license, other companies might be able to offer substantially identical products for sale, which could adversely affect our competitive business position and harm our business prospects. In addition, we may sublicense our rights under various third-party licenses to our partners. Any impairment of these sublicensed rights could result in reduced revenues under our collaboration agreements or result in termination of an agreement by one or more of our partners.

Disputes may also arise between us and our licensors regarding intellectual property subject to a license agreement, including:

If disputes over intellectual property that we have in-licensed or other related contractual rights prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on favorable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop our product candidates and the commercialization of any products derived from such product candidates may be adversely affected.

We are generally also subject to all of the same risks with respect to protection of intellectual property that we license, as we are for intellectual property that we own, which are described below. If we, our co-owners or our licensors fail to adequately protect, defend, maintain or enforce this intellectual property, our ability to commercialize products could suffer.

We rely on third parties to manufacture certain of our clinical product supplies, and we will rely on third parties to produce and process our product candidates, if approved.

We rely on outside vendors to manufacture supplies and process our product candidates. None of our product candidates have been manufactured or processed on a late-stage clinical trial or commercial scale and our third party CMOs and our future partners may not be able to achieve late-stage clinical trial or commercial-scale manufacturing and processing and may be unable to create an inventory of mass-produced product to satisfy demands for our product candidates.

We do not yet have sufficient information to reliably estimate the cost of the commercial manufacturing and processing of our product candidates, and the actual cost to manufacture and process our product candidates could materially and adversely affect the availability of our product candidates in sufficient quantities to conduct our clinical trials or the commercial viability of any products derived from our product candidates. As a result, we and/or our future partners may never be able to develop a commercially viable product.

In addition, our reliance on a limited number of third-party manufacturers exposes us to the following risks:

Each of these risks could delay our clinical trials, the approval, if any, of our product candidates or any products derived from our product candidates by the FDA, the EMA, the TGA or regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions or the commercialization of our product candidates, or result in higher costs or deprive us of potential product sales revenue. In addition, we will rely on third parties to perform release tests on our product candidates or any products derived from our product candidates prior to delivery to patients. If these tests are not appropriately done and test data are not reliable, patients could be put at risk of serious harm.

We and/or our future partners may, in the future, be dependent on single-source suppliers for some of the components and materials used in, and the processes required to develop, our product candidates.

We and/or our future partners may, in the future, be dependent on single-source suppliers for some of the components and materials used in, and manufacturing processes required to develop, our product candidates. We cannot ensure that these suppliers or service providers will remain in business, or have sufficient capacity or supply to meet our needs, or that they will not be purchased by one of our competitors or another company that is not interested in continuing to work with us. Our or our future partners use of single-source suppliers of raw materials, components, key processes and finished goods exposes us to several risks, including disruptions in supply, price increases or late deliveries. There are, in general, relatively few alternative sources of supply for substitute components. These vendors may be unable or unwilling to meet our future demands for our clinical trials or our future partners commercial sale of any products derived from our product candidates. Establishing additional or replacement suppliers for these components, materials and processes could take a substantial amount of time and it may be difficult to establish replacement suppliers who meet regulatory requirements. Any disruption in supply from any single-source supplier or service provider could lead to supply delays or interruptions which would damage our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

If we have to switch to a replacement supplier, the manufacture and delivery of our product candidates could be interrupted for an extended period, which could adversely affect our business. Establishing additional or replacement suppliers for any of the components or processes used in our product candidates, if required, may not be accomplished quickly. If we are able to find a replacement supplier, the replacement supplier would need to be qualified and may require additional regulatory authority approval, which could result in further delay. While we intend to maintain adequate inventory of the single source components and materials used in our product candidates, any interruption or delay in the supply of components or materials, or our inability to obtain components or materials from alternate sources at acceptable prices in a timely manner, could impair our ability to meet the demand for our product candidates.

In addition, as part of the FDA’s approval of our product candidates, FDA review of the individual components of our process, which include the manufacturing processes and facilities of our single-source suppliers will also be required.

Our reliance on these suppliers, service providers and manufacturers may subject us to a number of risks that could harm our reputation, business and financial condition, including, among other things:

If any of these risks materialize, costs could significantly increase and our and/or our partners’ ability to meet demand for our product candidates or any products derived from our product candidates could be adversely affected.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

If our efforts to obtain, maintain, protect, defend and/or enforce the intellectual property related to our product candidates and technologies are not adequate, we may not be able to compete effectively in our market.

Our commercial success depends in part on our ability to obtain, maintain, protect, defend and enforce patent and other intellectual property, including trade secret and know-how, protection for our product candidates, proprietary technologies and their uses, as well as our and our partners’ ability to operate, develop, manufacture and commercialize our product candidates without infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating the intellectual property or other proprietary rights of our competitors or any other third parties, including any non-practicing entities or patent assertion entities. We generally seek to protect our intellectual property position by filing and/or licensing patent applications in the United States, and Europe as well as in other countries related to our product candidates, proprietary technologies (including methods of manufacture) and their uses that are important to our business. While in some jurisdictions patent applications can be enforced through the issuance of a preliminary injunction, in general, our patent applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technology claimed in such applications unless, and until, patents issue from such applications, and then only to the extent that the issued claims cover third parties’ activities in the countries in which they are performed. We cannot be certain that the claims in any of our patent applications will be considered patentable by the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or the USPTO, courts in the United States or the patent offices and courts in Europe and in other jurisdictions, nor can we be certain that the claims in our issued patents will not be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that our patent applications or those of our licensors will result in additional patents being issued or that issued patents will adequately cover our product candidates or otherwise afford sufficient protection against competitors with similar technology, nor can there be any assurance that the patents issued will not be infringed, designed around, invalidated or held unenforceable. Furthermore, we may not be able to obtain patents on certain aspects of our current or future product candidates, proprietary technologies and their uses in a timely fashion, at a reasonable cost, in all jurisdictions, or at all, and any potential patent protection we obtain may not be sufficient to prevent substantial competition.

Even issued patents may later be found invalid or unenforceable or may be modified or revoked in proceedings before various patent offices or in courts in the United States, Europe or other jurisdictions. The degree of future protection for our intellectual property and other proprietary rights is uncertain. Only limited protection may be available and may not adequately protect our technologies or permit us to gain or keep any competitive advantage. If we do not adequately obtain, maintain, protect, defend and enforce our intellectual property and proprietary technology, competitors may be able to use our product candidates and proprietary technologies and erode or negate any competitive advantage we may have, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

The patent application process is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, and there can be no assurance that we or any of our current or future licensors or future partners will be successful in prosecuting, obtaining, protecting, maintaining, enforcing or defending patents and patent applications necessary or useful to protect our product candidates, proprietary technologies (including methods of manufacture) and their uses. These risks and uncertainties include, from time to time, the following:

The patent position of biopharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions, and has been the subject of much litigation in recent years. The standards that the USPTO and its counterparts use to grant patents are not always applied predictably or uniformly and can change. Similarly, the ultimate degree of protection that will be afforded to biotechnology inventions, including ours, in the United States and other countries, remains uncertain and is dependent upon the scope of the protection decided upon by patent offices, courts and lawmakers. Moreover, there are periodic changes in patent law, as well as discussions in the Congress of the United States and in international jurisdictions about modifying various aspects of patent law. There is no uniform, worldwide policy regarding the subject matter and scope of claims granted or allowable in pharmaceutical or biotechnology patents. In certain countries, for example, methods for the medical treatment of humans are not patentable. More generally, the laws of some countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as United States laws, and those countries may lack adequate rules and procedures for granting, maintaining, protecting, defending and enforcing our intellectual property rights. However, while certain incentives such as natural occurring products are not patentable in the United States, such inventions may be patentable in other jurisdictions, including Europe.

Furthermore, the patent prosecution process is also expensive and time-consuming, and we may not be able to file, prosecute, maintain, protect, defend, enforce or license all necessary or desirable patents or patent applications, as applicable, at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. It is 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 future partners, outside scientific future partners, CROs, CMOs, consultants, advisors and other third parties, any of these parties may breach such agreements and disclose such output before a patent application is filed, thereby jeopardizing our ability to seek patent protection. We also rely to a certain extent on trade secrets, know-how, and technology, which are not protected by patents, to maintain our competitive position. If any trade secret, know-how or other technology not protected by a patent were to be disclosed to or independently developed by a competitor, our business and financial condition could be materially adversely affected.

The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, priority date, scope, term, validity or enforceability so that any patents that may issue or that we may license may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States, Europe and other jurisdictions. Once granted, patents may remain open to a variety of challenges, including opposition, interference, re-examination, post-grant review, inter partes review, nullification or derivation action in court or before patent offices or similar proceedings, and furthermore, may be challenged as a defense in any enforcement action that we might bring. Such challenges may result in loss of exclusivity or in patent claims being narrowed, terminated, disclaimed, invalidated, assigned to others or held unenforceable, any or all of which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical products, or limit the scope and/or term of patent protection of our products and product candidates and/or eliminate it altogether, thus hindering or removing our ability to limit third parties from making, using or selling products or technologies that are similar or identical to ours, and/or reduce or eliminate royalty payments to us from our licensees. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. Furthermore, our pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued which protect our technology or product candidates or which effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies and product candidates. As a result, our intellectual property may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.

Our ability to enforce our owned and in-licensed patent and other intellectual property rights depends on our ability to detect infringement, misappropriation and other violation of such patents and other intellectual property. It may be difficult to detect infringers, misappropriators and other violators who do not advertise the components or methods that are used in connection with their products and services. Moreover, it may be difficult or impossible to obtain evidence of infringement, misappropriation or other violation in a competitor’s or potential competitor’s product or service, and in some cases, we may not be able to introduce obtained evidence into a proceeding or otherwise utilize it to successfully demonstrate infringement. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded if we were to prevail may not be commercially meaningful.

In addition, proceedings to enforce or defend our owned or in-licensed patents could put our patents at risk of being invalidated, held unenforceable or interpreted narrowly. Such proceedings could also provoke third parties to assert claims against us, including that some or all of the claims in one or more of our patents are invalid or otherwise unenforceable. Such challenges may result in loss of patent rights, loss of exclusivity, or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our technology and product candidates. If any of our owned or in-licensed patents covering our product candidates or other technologies are narrowed, invalidated or found unenforceable, or if a court found that valid, enforceable patents held by third parties covered one or more of our product candidates or other technologies, our competitive position could be harmed or we could be required to incur significant expenses to protect, enforce or defend our rights. If we initiate lawsuits to protect, defend or enforce our patents, or litigate against third-party claims, such proceedings would be expensive and would divert the attention of our management and technical personnel, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us. Furthermore, because of the potentially 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 the course of litigation.

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

Other companies or organizations may challenge our intellectual property rights or may assert intellectual property rights that prevent us from developing our product candidates and other technologies, and may prevent our future partners from commercializing any products derived from our product candidates.

Our business involves new and evolving scientific fields, the continued development and potential use of which has resulted in many different patents and patent applications from organizations and individuals seeking to obtain intellectual property protection in the fields. We own and in-license patent applications and issued patents that describe and/or claim certain technologies, including products, reagents, formulations and methods including uses and manufacturing methods, or features or aspects of any of these. These issued patents and pending patent applications claim certain compositions of matter and methods relating to the discovery, development, manufacture and commercialization of therapeutic modalities and our delivery technologies, including LNPs. If we, our co-owners, our licensors, including our future partners, are unable to obtain, maintain, protect, defend or enforce patent protection with respect to our product candidates and other technology and any product candidates and technology we develop, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially harmed.

As the scientific fields mature, our known competitors and other third parties have filed, and will continue to file, patent applications claiming inventions in the field in the United States and in other countries. There is uncertainty about which patents will issue, and, if they do, as to when, to whom and with what claims. With respect to both in-licensed and owned intellectual property, we cannot predict whether the patent applications we and our licensors are currently pursuing will issue as patents in any particular jurisdiction or whether the claims of any issued patents will provide sufficient protection from competitors.

We, our co-owners or our licensors, including our future partners, may in the future become a party to patent proceedings or priority disputes in the United States, Europe or other jurisdictions. The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the America Invents Act, enacted in September 2011, included 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 through USPTO-administered post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review and derivation proceedings. We expect that our competitors and other third parties may institute litigation and other proceedings, such as interference, reexamination and opposition proceedings, as well as inter partes and post-grant review proceedings against us and the patents and patent applications that we own and in-license. We expect that we may be subject to similar proceedings or priority disputes, including oppositions, in Europe or other foreign jurisdictions relating to patents and patent applications in our portfolio.

If we, our co-owners or our licensors, including our future partners, are unsuccessful in any interference proceedings or other priority or validity disputes, including any derivations, post-grant review, inter partes review or oppositions, to which we or they are subject, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights through the narrowing or loss of one or more patents owned or in-licensed, or our owned or in-licensed patent claims may be narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable. In many cases, the possibility of appeal exists for either us or our opponents, and it may be years before final, unappealable rulings are made with respect to these patents in certain jurisdictions. The timing and outcome of these and other proceedings is uncertain and may adversely affect our business if we are not successful in defending the patentability and scope of our pending and issued patent claims. In addition, third parties may attempt to invalidate our intellectual property rights. Even if our rights are not directly challenged, disputes could lead to the weakening of our intellectual property rights. Our defense against any attempt by third parties to circumvent or invalidate our intellectual property rights could be costly to us, could require significant time and attention of our management and could have a material adverse impact on our business and our ability to successfully compete against our current and future competitors.

There are many issued and pending patent filings that claim aspects of technologies that we or our future partners may need for our product candidates or any products derived from our product candidates, including patent filings that relate to relevant delivery technologies. There are also many issued patents that claim targeting genes or portions of genes that may be relevant for immunotherapies we wish to develop. In addition, there may be issued and pending patent applications that may be asserted against us in a court proceeding or otherwise based upon the asserting party’s belief that we or our future partners may need such patents for the development, manufacturing and commercialization of our product candidates or any products derived from our product candidates. Thus, it is possible that one or more organizations, ranging from our competitors to non-practicing entities or patent assertion entities, has or will hold patent rights to which we may need a license, or hold patent rights which could be asserted against us. Such licenses may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all, or may be non-exclusive. If those organizations refuse to grant us a license to such patent rights on reasonable terms or a court rules that we need such patent rights that have been asserted against us and we are not able to obtain a license on reasonable terms or at all, we may be unable to perform research and development or other activities or market products covered by such patents, and we or our future partners may need to cease the development, manufacture and commercialization of one or more of the product candidates or any products derived from our product candidates we or our future partners may develop. Any of the foregoing could result in a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects.

We may not be successful in obtaining, maintaining, protecting or defending the necessary intellectual property rights to allow us to identify and develop product candidates, product components and manufacturing processes for our development pipeline.

We currently have rights to certain intellectual property, through our owned and in-licensed patents and other intellectual property rights, relating to identification and development of our product candidates or other technologies. As our pipeline may involve additional product candidates that could require the use of intellectual property and other proprietary rights held by third parties, the growth of our business could depend in part on our ability to acquire, in-license or use such intellectual property and proprietary rights. In addition, our product candidates may require specific formulations to work effectively and efficiently and these intellectual property and other proprietary rights may be held by others. We may be unable to secure such licenses or otherwise 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, on reasonable terms, or at all, for product candidates and other technologies that we may develop. The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and a number of more established companies are also pursuing 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, cash resources, and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities.

For example, we have in the past and may continue to collaborate with academic institutions in certain aspects of our pre-clinical research or development under written agreements with these institutions. Typically, these institutions provide us with an option to negotiate a license to any of the institution’s rights in technology resulting from the collaboration. However, these institutions may not honor our option and right of first negotiation for intellectual property rights or we may otherwise be unable to negotiate a license within the specified time frame or under terms that are acceptable to us. If we are unable to do so, the institution may offer the intellectual property rights to other parties, potentially blocking our ability to pursue our program or otherwise continue to develop certain product candidates or other technologies.

Moreover, some of our owned patents and patent applications are, and may in the future be, co-owned with third parties. If we are unable to obtain, or continue to maintain, exclusive rights to any such third-party co-owners’ interest in such patents or patent applications, such co-owners may be able to license their rights to other third parties, including our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technologies. In addition, we may need the cooperation of any such co-owners of our patents in order to enforce such patents against third parties, and such cooperation may not be provided to us. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations and prospects.

In addition, third parties 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. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property rights or maintain, protect, defend or enforce the existing intellectual property rights we have, we may have to abandon the development of the relevant program or product candidate and our future partners may have to abandon the commercialization of any products derived from our product candidates, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

The lifespans of our patents may not be sufficient to effectively protect our product candidates, technologies and business.

Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years after its first effective non-provisional filing date, assuming maintenance fees are timely paid after the patent has issued. Most foreign jurisdictions also provide a 20-year nominal patent term, though many require payment of regular, often annual, annuities to maintain pendency of an application or viability of an issued patent. In some jurisdictions, one or more options for extension of a patent term may be available, but even with such extensions, the lifespan of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Even if patents covering our product candidates, proprietary technologies and their uses are obtained, once the patent term has expired, we may be subject to competition from third parties that can then use the inventions included in such patents to create competing products and technologies. In addition, although upon issuance in the United States a patient’s life can be increased based on certain delays caused by the USPTO, this increase can be reduced or eliminated based on certain delays caused by the patent applicant during patent prosecution. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such product candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. If any patents that we own or in-license expire, we would not be able to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products, and our competitors could market competing products and technology. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations and prospects.

If we do not obtain patent term extension and data exclusivity for any product candidates we may develop, our business may be materially harmed.

Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of any FDA marketing approval of any product candidates we may develop, one or more of our United States patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Action of 1984, or Hatch-Waxman Amendments. The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent extension term of up to five years as compensation for patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process. A patent term extension 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. However, we may not be granted an extension because of, for example, failing to exercise due diligence during the testing phase or regulatory review process, failing to apply within applicable deadlines, failing to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents, or otherwise failing to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the applicable time period or the scope of patent protection afforded could be less than we request. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or the term of any such extension is less than we request, our competitors may obtain approval of competing products following our patent expiration, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially harmed.

If we fail to comply with our obligations in the agreements under which we license intellectual property rights from third parties or otherwise experience disruptions to our business relationships with our licensors, we could lose license rights that are important to our business.

We may be reliant upon licenses to certain intellectual property and other proprietary rights from third parties that are important or necessary to the development and commercialization of our technology and product candidates, and we expect to enter into similar license agreements in the future. Licensing of intellectual property is important to our business and involves complex legal, business and scientific issues and is complicated by the rapid pace of scientific discovery in our industry. Our licenses may not provide exclusive rights to use such intellectual property and technology in all relevant fields of use and in all territories in which we may wish to develop or commercialize our technology and products in the future. As a result, we may not be able to prevent competitors from developing and commercializing competitive products in territories included in any or all of our licenses.

Where we obtain licenses from, or collaborate with, third parties, in some circumstances we may not have the right to control the preparation, filing, prosecution, maintenance, enforcement and defense of patents and patent applications covering the technology that we license from third parties, or such activities, if controlled by us, may require the input of such third parties. In some cases, patent prosecution of our in-licensed intellectual property is controlled solely by the licensor. We may also require the cooperation of our licensors and future partners to enforce or defend any in-licensed patent rights, and such cooperation may not be provided. Therefore, we cannot be certain that these patents and patent applications will be prepared, filed, prosecuted, maintained, protected, enforced or defended in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business. Any patents or patent applications that we in-license may be challenged, narrowed, circumvented, invalidated or held unenforceable, or our licensors may not properly maintain such patents or patent applications and they may expire. If our licensors fail to obtain, maintain, defend, protect or enforce the intellectual property we license from them, we could lose our rights to the intellectual property and our competitors could market competing products using the inventions in such intellectual property. In certain cases, we control the prosecution of patents included from in-licensed technology. In the event we breach any of our obligations related to such prosecution, we may incur significant liability to our partners. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations and prospects.

Moreover, any failure to satisfy obligations or any material breach under any of our licenses to third-party intellectual property could give the licensor the right to terminate the license. Our existing license agreements impose, and we expect that future license agreements will impose, various diligence, milestone and royalty payment, exclusivity and other obligations on us. If we fail to comply with our obligations under these agreements, or we are subject to a bankruptcy, the licensor may have the right to terminate the license agreement, in which event we would not be able to develop, market and commercialize product candidates covered by the license agreement. In spite of our best efforts and even if we disagree, our licensors might still conclude that we have materially breached our license agreements and might therefore terminate the license agreements, thereby removing our ability to develop and commercialize the product candidates covered by these license agreements. In the event that any of our license agreements were to be terminated by the licensor, we may need to negotiate new or reinstated agreements, which may not be available to us on equally favorable terms, or at all. If these license agreements are terminated, or if the underlying patents or other intellectual property fail to provide the intended exclusivity, competitors would have the freedom to seek regulatory approval of, and to market and commercialize, products similar or identical to ours. In addition, we may seek to obtain additional licenses from our licensors and, in connection with obtaining such licenses, we may agree to amend our existing license agreements in a manner that may be more favorable to the licensors, including by agreeing to terms that could enable third parties (potentially including our competitors) to receive licenses to a portion of the intellectual property that is subject to our existing licenses.

We are generally also subject to all of the same risks with respect to protection of intellectual property that we license, as we are for intellectual property that we own, which are described in this section. If we, our co-owners or our licensors, including our future partners, fail to adequately protect this intellectual property, our and our future partners ability to develop our product candidates, as well as the economic feasibility and our partners’ ability to develop, market and commercialize any products derived from our product candidates, could suffer. Moreover, if disputes over intellectual property that we have in-licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on commercially acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop our product candidates, and our future partners may not be able to successfully market and commercialize any products derived from our product candidates, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Our current proprietary position for certain product candidates depends upon our owned or in-licensed patent filings covering components of such product candidates, manufacturing-related methods, formulations and/or methods of use, which may not adequately prevent a competitor or other third party from using the same product candidate for the same or a different use.

Composition of matter patent protection is generally considered to be desirable because it provides protection without regard to any particular method of use or manufacture or formulation. While we have obtained patent protection covering components of certain product candidates, manufacturing-related methods, formulations and/or methods of use and claims issued that are directed to a vaccine formulation containing a broadly defined protein antigen, we do not currently have any claims in our owned or in-licensed issued United States or European patents that cover the overall construct used in our product candidates, and we cannot be certain that claims in any future patents issuing from our pending owned or in-licensed patent applications or our future owned or in-licensed patent applications will cover the composition of matter of our current or future product candidates.

Method of use patents protect the use of a product for the specified method and formulation patents cover formulations to deliver therapeutics. These types of patents do not prevent a competitor or other third party from developing, marketing or commercializing a similar or identical product for an indication that is outside the scope of the patented method or from developing a different formulation that is outside the scope of the patented formulation. Moreover, with respect to method of use patents, even if competitors or other third parties do not actively promote their product for our targeted indications or uses for which we may obtain patents, physicians may recommend that patients use these products off-label, or patients may do so themselves. Although off-label use may infringe or contribute to the infringement of method of use patents, the practice is common and this type of infringement is difficult to prevent or enforce. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in the United States or other countries.

Moreover, competitors or other third parties may in their commercial activities rely on secret know-how, including reliance on secret technologies. Such secret technologies may include manufacturing processes, intermediary products, manufacturing tools etc., the existence and utility of which is by nature not known to the public and for which we at a later stage may therefore seek patent protection and obtain valid patents. Such competitors and third parties could, if they can document their prior secret use of the patented technologies, have acquired prior user rights under applicable national laws, including in the United States the defense to patent infringement defined in 35 U.S.C. §273, that protect such competitors and third parties from claims of patent infringement raised by us. Under such circumstances, we might not be able to adequately prevent such a competitor or third party from commercially exploiting our patented technology in the United States or in other countries.

Intellectual property rights of third parties could adversely affect our partners’ ability to commercialize any products derive from our product candidates, and we and/or our future partners might be required to litigate or obtain licenses from third parties in order to develop or market our product candidates.

Because our product candidates are still in early developmental stages, and one or more features of the product candidates or related technologies such as their manufacture, formulation or use, may still change, we cannot be confident that we are aware of all third-party intellectual property that might be relevant to products that we eventually hope to commercialize. Various third-party competitors practice in relevant spaces, and may have issued patents, or patent applications that will issue as patents in the future, that will impede or preclude our ability to commercialize products. Furthermore, while United States patent laws provide a “safe harbor” to our clinical product candidates under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1), which exempts from patent infringement activities related to pursuing FDA approval for a drug product, that exemption expires when a BLA or NDA is submitted. Given the uncertainty of clinical trials, we cannot be certain of the timing of their completion and it is possible that we might want to submit a BLA or NDA at a time when one or more relevant third-party patents is in force. Thus, it is possible that at the time that we commercialize our product candidates, one or more third parties may have issued patent claims that cover our products or critical features of their production or use. We may not be able to commercialize our products if patents issued to third parties or other third-party intellectual property rights cover, or may be alleged to cover, our products or elements thereof, or their methods of manufacture or use at the time that we seek to commercialize them. In such cases, we may not be in a position to develop or commercialize product candidates unless we successfully pursue litigation to nullify or invalidate the third-party intellectual property right concerned, successfully design around their claims, or enter into a license agreement with the intellectual property right holder(s). Such litigation or licenses could be costly or not available on commercially reasonable terms or at all, and design-around could be prohibitively expensive or impossible.

It is also possible that we have failed to identify relevant third-party patents that cover, or applications that will mature into patents that cover, one or more aspects of our platforms or product candidates. Given that, in most jurisdictions, a patent application is confidential when initially filed, and typically remains so until it is published about 18 months after the initial filing, it may not be possible for us to identify certain relevant filings in time to avoid using the technology that they claim. Additionally, the claims of pending patent applications and divisional continuation applications filed at a late stage can, subject to certain limitations, be amended over time, so that even patent applications whose claims did not cover our products or activities when published could be amended to cover one or more aspects of our platforms or product candidates over time, and we might not be aware that such amendment had been made.

We may be involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our intellectual property or the intellectual property of our licensors, or to defend against third-party claims that we infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate such third party’s intellectual property, each of which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful.

There is a substantial amount of litigation, both within and outside the United States, involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, including patent infringement lawsuits, interferences, oppositions, ex parte reexaminations, post-grant review, and inter partes review proceedings before the USPTO and corresponding European and other non-United States patent offices. Competitors and other third parties may infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate our intellectual property rights or those of our licensors. To prevent infringement, misappropriation or other unauthorized use, we may be required to file claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. In certain instances, we may institute inter partes review proceedings against issued United States patents and opposition proceedings against European patents owned by third parties in the field of immunotherapy. As the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries expand and more patents are issued, the risk increases that our product candidates may be subject to claims of infringement of the patent rights of third parties.

In addition, in a patent infringement proceeding, our owned, or in-licensed patents may be challenged and a court may decide that a patent we own, or in-license is not valid, is unenforceable and/or is not infringed. If we or any of our potential future partners were to initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent directed at one of our product candidates, the defendant could counterclaim that our patent is invalid and/or unenforceable in whole or in part. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge include an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, including lack of novelty, obviousness or non-enablement. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could include 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 also raise similar claims before the USPTO, even outside the context of litigation. Similar mechanisms for challenging the validity and enforceability of a patent exist in ex-United States patent offices and may result in the revocation, cancellation or amendment of any ex-United States patents we hold in the future. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable, and prior art could render our patents or those of our licensors invalid. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity and/or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on such product candidate. Such a loss of patent protection would have a material adverse impact on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations and prospects.

Third parties, ranging from our competitors to non-practicing entities or patent assertion entities, may assert that we are employing their intellectual property and other proprietary technology without authorization. There may be third-party patents or patent applications with claims to materials, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods for treatment related to the use, development, manufacture or commercialization of our product candidates. As patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending patent applications which may later result in issued patents that our product candidates may infringe. In addition, third parties may obtain patents in the future and claim that our technologies infringe upon these patents. If any third-party patents were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover the manufacturing process of any of our product candidates, any molecules formed during the manufacturing process or any final product itself, the holders of any such patents may obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could effectively block our ability to develop and commercialize such product candidate unless we obtained a license under the applicable patents, or until such patents expire. Similarly, if any third-party patents were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover aspects of our formulations, processes for manufacture or methods of use, including combination therapy, the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to develop and commercialize the applicable product candidate unless we obtained a license or until such patent expires. In either case, such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, or may be non-exclusive.

Interference or derivation proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by us or declared by the USPTO may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions with respect to our patents or patent applications or those of our licensors. An unfavorable outcome could require us to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights to it from the prevailing party. Our business could be harmed if the prevailing party does not offer us a license on commercially reasonable terms or at all, or if a non-exclusive license is offered and our competitors gain access to the same intellectual property and technology. Our defense of litigation, interference, derivation or similar proceedings may fail and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distract our management and other employees. In addition, the uncertainties associated with litigation could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our clinical trials, continue our research programs, license necessary technology from third parties or enter into development or manufacturing collaborations that would help us bring our product candidates to market.

Even if resolved in our favor, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to our intellectual property rights may cause us to incur significant expenses, and could distract our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development 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. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could compromise our ability to compete in the marketplace.

In the event of a successful claim of infringement, misappropriation or other violation against us, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, pay royalties, redesign our infringing products, or obtain one or more licenses from third parties, which may not be made available on commercially favorable terms, if at all, or may require substantial time and expense.

Such licenses are likely to be non-exclusive and, therefore, our competitors may have access to the same intellectual property and technology licensed to us. If we fail to obtain a required license and are unable to design around a patent, we may be unable to effectively market some of our technology and product candidates, which could limit our ability to generate revenues or achieve profitability and possibly prevent us from generating revenue sufficient to sustain our operations. Moreover, certain of our collaborations provide, and we expect additional collaborations to provide, that royalties payable to us for licenses to our intellectual property may be offset by amounts paid by our future partners to third parties for licenses to such third parties’ intellectual property in the relevant fields, which could result in significant reductions in our revenues from products developed through collaborations.

In addition, in connection with certain license and collaboration agreements, we have agreed, and may in the future agree, to indemnify certain third parties for certain costs incurred in connection with litigation relating to intellectual property rights or the subject matter of the agreements. The cost to us of any litigation or other proceeding relating to intellectual property rights, even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial.

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

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

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees, and various other governmental fees on patents and applications will be due to be paid to the USPTO and various governmental patent agencies outside of the United States in several stages over the lifetime of the patents or applications. We have systems in place to remind us to pay these fees and we may employ outside firms and rely on our outside counsel to pay these fees due to non-United States patent agencies; however, we cannot guarantee that we will successfully pay these fees. The USPTO and various non-United States governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment, and other similar provisions during the patent application process. We employ reputable law firms and other professionals to help us comply, and in many cases, an inadvertent lapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules. However, there are situations in which non-compliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. We are also dependent on our licensors to take the necessary action to comply with these requirements with respect to our in-licensed intellectual property, and we cannot guarantee that they will do so. In such an event, our competitors might be able to enter the market with similar or identical products or technology, and this would have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

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

As is the case with other biotechnology companies, our success is dependent on our intellectual property rights, particularly patents that we own and in-license. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the biotechnology industry involve both technological and legal complexity, and therefore obtaining and enforcing biotechnology patents is costly, time-consuming and inherently uncertain. Moreover, there are periodic changes in patent law. For example, after March 2013, under the America Invents Act, 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. 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. 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 our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

In addition, recent United States Supreme Court rulings have narrowed the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances and weakened the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on decisions by the United States Congress, the federal courts and the USPTO, and their equivalents in other jurisdictions, 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 obtain, maintain, protect, defend or enforce our intellectual property in the future.

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 some of our technology and product candidates, we also seek to rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to maintain our competitive position and protect proprietary know-how that is not patentable, processes for which patents are difficult to enforce and any other elements of our product discovery and development processes that involve proprietary know-how, information or technology that is not covered by patents. However, trade secrets and know-how may be difficult to protect.

We seek to protect these trade secrets, know-how 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 future partners, outside scientific future partners, CROs, CMOs, consultants, advisors and other third parties. We also enter into confidentiality and invention or patent assignment agreements with our employees and consultants and require all of our employees and key consultants who have access to our trade secrets, proprietary know-how, information or technology to enter into confidentiality agreements. 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 our best efforts, any of these parties may breach the agreements and we cannot be certain that our trade secrets and other confidential proprietary information will not be disclosed or that competitors will not otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or independently develop substantially equivalent information and techniques. 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 or know-how 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 and know-how. If any of our trade secrets or know-how 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 we are unable to prevent unauthorized material disclosure of our intellectual property to third parties, we will not be able to establish or maintain a competitive advantage in our market, which could materially adversely affect our business, operating results, financial condition and prospects.

We may be subject to claims that we have wrongfully hired an employee from a competitor, or that our employees, consultants or independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information of third parties or that our employees have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged trade secrets of their former employers.

We have received confidential and proprietary information from third parties in the course of our research and other collaborations with others in the industry, academic institutions and other third parties. In addition, many 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, independent contractors and advisors do not use the confidential or proprietary information, trade secrets or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed confidential or proprietary information, trade secrets or know-how of these third parties, or that our employees, consultants, independent contractors or advisors have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed confidential information, trade secrets or know-how of such individual’s current or former employer. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. Even if we are successful in defending against these claims, litigation could result in substantial cost and be a distraction to our management and employees. Claims that we, our employees, consultants or advisors have misappropriated the confidential or proprietary information, trade secrets or know-how of third parties could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

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

We may, in the future, be subject to claims that current or former employees, consultants, independent contractors, future partners or other third parties have an interest in our patents or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. While it is our policy to require our employees, consultants, independent contractors, future partners and other third parties who may be involved in the conception, development or reduction to practice 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, develops or reduces to practice such 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. For example, we may have inventorship disputes arise from conflicting obligations of employees, consultants, independent contractors, future partners or other third parties who are involved in developing and commercializing our product candidates. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees.

Furthermore, the laws of some countries do not protect intellectual property and other proprietary rights or establish ownership of inventions to the same extent or in the same manner as the laws of the United States. A majority of our employees work in Denmark and are subject to Danish employment law. Employees’ inventions that are either patentable or registrable as Danish utility models are subject to the provisions of the Danish Act on Employee Inventions, which regulates the ownership of, and compensation for, inventions made by employees. We face the risk that disputes can occur between us and our employees or former employees pertaining to alleged non-adherence to the provisions of this act. Such disputes may be costly to defend and may take up our management’s time and efforts regardless of whether we prevail or fail in any such dispute. There is a risk that the compensation we provided to employees who have assigned the rights to inventions to us may be deemed to be insufficient and we may under Danish law be required to increase the compensation due to such employees for the assignment of rights to such inventions. In those cases where rights to employees’ inventions have not been assigned to us, we may need to agree with the respective employees on the assignment of such inventions, including i.e. by paying a suitable compensation for the use of those patents. If we are required to pay additional compensation or face other disputes under the Danish Act on Employee Inventions, our business, results of operations and financial condition could be adversely affected.

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

Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States can be less extensive than those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as laws in Denmark and 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 to the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own product candidates 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 product candidates, 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, misappropriation or other violation of our patents and other intellectual property or development, marketing and commercialization of competing products in violation of our intellectual property and other proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our intellectual property rights in such 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 and our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or in-license.

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 or any of our licensors is 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.

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 unregistered trademarks or trade names, as well as any trademarks or service marks that we may register, may be challenged, infringed, circumvented or declared generic or determined to be infringing on other marks. We may not be able to protect our rights to these trademarks and trade names, which we need to build name recognition among potential future partners or customers in our markets of interest. At times, competitors 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 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. We may license our trademarks and trade names to third parties, such as distributors. Though these license agreements may provide guidelines for how our trademarks and trade names may be used, a breach of these agreements or misuse of our trademarks and trade names by our licensees may jeopardize our rights in or diminish the goodwill associated with our trademarks and trade names. Our efforts to enforce or protect our proprietary rights related to trademarks, trade names, trade secrets, know-how, domain names, copyrights 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 to our competitive advantage.

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:

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

We and our future partners or other contractors or consultants depend on information technology systems, and any failure of these systems could harm our business. Security breaches, loss of data and other disruptions could compromise sensitive information related to our business or prevent us from accessing critical information and expose us to liability, which could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Our internal computer systems and those of our current and any future partners, vendors, and other contractors or consultants are vulnerable to damage from computer viruses, unauthorized access, natural disasters, pandemics, terrorism, cybersecurity threats, war, and telecommunication and electrical failures. If any such material system failure, accident or security breach were to occur and cause interruptions in our operations, 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 proprietary information or other similar disruptions. For example, the loss of pre-clinical data and/or clinical trial data from one or more ongoing or completed pre-clinical projects or future clinical trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. In addition, because of our approach to running multiple projects in parallel, any breach of our computer systems may result in a loss of data or compromised data integrity across many of our programs in many stages of development. Any such breach, loss or compromise of clinical trial participant personal data may also subject us to civil fines and penalties, including under the GDPR and relevant member state law in the European Union, and the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, and other relevant state and federal privacy laws in the United States. To the extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in a loss of, or damage to, data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability, our competitive position could be harmed and the further development and commercialization of our product candidates could be delayed.

While we have not experienced any material system failures, accidents or security breaches to date, however, we cannot guarantee that third parties will not be able to gain unauthorized access to or otherwise breach our systems in the future. Any such unauthorized access or breach could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Risks Related to Government Regulation

Even if our future partners obtain regulatory approval for a product derived from one of our product candidates, such products will remain subject to regulatory scrutiny.

If a product derived from one of our product candidates is approved, it will be subject to ongoing regulatory requirements for manufacturing, labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion, sampling, record-keeping, conduct of post-marketing studies, and submission of safety, efficacy, and other post- market information, including both federal and state requirements in the United States and requirements of comparable foreign regulatory authorities.

BLA and NDA holders, as well as manufacturers of drug and biologics facilities are required to comply with extensive FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authority requirements, including ensuring that quality control and manufacturing procedures conform to cGMP regulations. As such, we and our contract manufacturers will be subject to continual review and inspections to assess compliance with cGMP and adherence to commitments made in any approved marketing application. Accordingly, we, our partner and others with whom we work must continue to expend time, money, and effort in all areas of regulatory compliance, including manufacturing, production, and quality control.

Our future partners will have to comply with requirements concerning advertising and promotion for our products. Promotional communications with respect to prescription drugs and biologics are subject to a variety of legal and regulatory restrictions and must be consistent with the information in the product’s approved label. As such, our future partners may not promote our products “off-label” for indications or uses for which they do not have approval. The holder of an approved application must submit new or supplemental applications and obtain approval for certain changes to the approved product, product labeling, or manufacturing process. Our future partners could also be asked to conduct post-marketing clinical studies to verify the safety and efficacy of our products in general or in specific patient subsets. An unsuccessful post-marketing study or failure to complete such a study could result in the withdrawal of marketing approval.

If a regulatory agency discovers previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where the product is manufactured, or disagrees with the promotion, marketing or labeling of a product, such regulatory agency may impose restrictions on that product or us, including requiring withdrawal of the product from the market. If we fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, a regulatory agency or enforcement authority may, among other things:

Any government investigation of alleged violations of law could require us and/or our future partners to expend significant time and resources in response, and could generate negative publicity. Any failure to comply with ongoing regulatory requirements may significantly and adversely affect our partners’ ability to commercialize and generate revenue from any products derived from our product candidates. If regulatory sanctions are applied or if regulatory approval is withdrawn, the value of our company and our operating results will be adversely affected.

Moreover, the policies of the FDA, the EMA and of other regulatory authorities may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of any products derived from our product candidates. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative or executive action, either in the United States, Europe or other countries. For example, certain policies of the current United States administration may impact our business and industry. Namely, the current United States administration has taken 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 how these orders will be implemented, and the extent to which they will impact the FDA’s ability to exercise its regulatory authority. If these executive actions impose restrictions on FDA’s ability to engage in oversight and implementation activities in the normal course, our business may be negatively impacted. In addition, if we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.

We and our future partners may be subject, directly or indirectly, to federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws, false claims laws, and other healthcare laws. If we and/or our future partners are unable to comply, or have not fully complied, with such laws, we and/or our future partners could face substantial penalties.

We and/or our future partners may be subject to additional healthcare regulation and enforcement by the United States federal government and by authorities in the United States, the European Union and other jurisdictions in which we conduct our business. If our future partners obtain FDA approval for any products derived from our product candidates and begin commercializing those products in the United States, our operations may be indirectly through our future partners and their prescribers, customers and purchasers, subject to various federal and state fraud and abuse laws and regulations, including, without limitation, the federal Health Care Program Anti-Kickback Statute, the federal civil and criminal False Claims Act, and the Physician Payments Sunshine Act and regulations. Many states and other jurisdictions have similar laws and regulations, some of which may be broader in scope. These laws will impact, among other things, our proposed sales, marketing and educational programs. In addition, we may be subject to patient privacy laws enacted by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. The laws that will affect our operations include, but are not limited to the following:

Due to the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and safe harbors available, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any other government regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from participation in government health care programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, imprisonment, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.

The provision of benefits or advantages to physicians to induce or encourage the prescription, recommendation, endorsement, purchase, supply, order or use of medicinal products is prohibited in the European Union. The provision of benefits or advantages to physicians is also governed by the national anti-bribery laws of European Union member states, such as the U.K. Bribery Act 2010. Infringement of these laws could result in substantial fines and imprisonment.

Payments made to physicians in certain European Union member states must be publicly disclosed. Moreover, agreements with physicians often must be the subject of prior notification and approval by the physician’s employer, his or her competent professional organization or the regulatory authorities of the individual European Union member states. These requirements are provided in the national laws, industry codes, or professional codes of conduct, applicable in the European Union member states. Failure to comply with these requirements could result in reputational risk, public reprimands, administrative penalties, fines or imprisonment.

We are subject to certain anti-corruption, anti-money laundering, export control, sanctions, and other trade laws and regulations. We can face serious consequences for violations.

Among other matters, anti-corruption, anti-money laundering, export control, sanctions, and other trade laws and regulations, which are collectively referred to as “trade laws”, prohibit companies and their employees, agents, CROs, CMOs, legal counsel, accountants, consultants, contractors and other future partners from authorizing, promising, offering, providing, soliciting, or receiving directly or indirectly, corrupt or improper payments or anything else of value to or from recipients in the public or private sector. Violations of trade laws can result in substantial criminal fines and civil penalties, imprisonment, the loss of trade privileges, debarment, tax reassessments, breach of contract and fraud litigation, reputational harm, and other consequences. We have direct or indirect interactions with officials and employees of government agencies or government-affiliated hospitals, universities and other organizations. We plan to engage third parties for clinical trials and/or to obtain necessary permits, licenses, intellectual property (including patents) and other regulatory approvals, and we can be held liable for the corrupt or other illegal activities of our personnel, agents or future partners, even if we do not explicitly authorize or have prior knowledge of such activities.

We are subject to stringent privacy laws, information security policies and contractual obligations governing the use, processing, and cross-border transfer of personal information and our data privacy and security practices.

We receive, generate and store significant and increasing volumes of sensitive information, such as employee, personal and patient data. We are subject to a variety of local, state, national and international laws, directives and regulations that apply to the collection, use, storage, retention, protection, disclosure, transfer and other processing of personal data, collectively referred to as “data processing”, in the different jurisdictions in which we operate, including comprehensive regulatory systems in the United States and Europe. Legal requirements relating to data processing continue to evolve and may result in ever-increasing public scrutiny and escalating levels of enforcement, sanctions and increased costs of compliance.

Compliance with United States and international data protection laws and regulations could cause us to incur substantial costs or require us to change our business practices and compliance procedures in a manner adverse to our business. Moreover, complying with these various laws could require us to take on more onerous obligations in our contracts, restrict our ability to collect, use and disclose data, or in some cases, impact our ability to operate in certain jurisdictions. Failure to comply with United States, European and other international data protection laws and regulations could result in government enforcement actions (which could include civil or criminal penalties), private litigation and/or adverse publicity and could negatively affect our operating results and business. Claims that we have violated individuals’ privacy rights, failed to comply with data protection laws, or breached our contractual obligations, even if we are not found liable, could be expensive and time consuming to defend, could result in adverse publicity and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Various states in the United States, such as California and Massachusetts, have implemented similar privacy laws and regulations, such as the California Confidentiality of Medical Information Act, that impose restrictive requirements regulating the use and disclosure of patient health information and other personal information. In addition to fines and penalties imposed upon violators, some of these state laws also afford private rights of action to individuals who believe their personal information has been misused. California’s patient privacy laws, for example, provide for penalties of up to $250,000 and permit injured parties to sue for damages. In addition to the California Confidentiality of Medical Information Act, California also recently enacted the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, or CCPA, which became effective on January 1, 2020. The CCPA has been characterized as the first “GDPR-like” privacy statute to be enacted in the United States because it mirrors a number of the key provisions of the European Union General Data Protection Regulation (described below). The CCPA establishes a new privacy framework for covered businesses in the State of California, by creating an expanded definition of personal information, establishing new data privacy rights for consumers imposing special rules on the collection of consumer data from minors, and creating a new and potentially severe statutory damages framework for violations of the CCPA and for businesses that fail to implement reasonable security procedures and practices to prevent data breaches. An initiative called the California Privacy Rights Act, or CCPA 2.0, passed in November 2020 and builds upon and amends the original CCPA aligning it more closely with the GDPR. CCPA 2.0 expands the privacy rights of California residents and could impact our operations or that of our partners. Other states have been considering legislation similar to the CCPA, and several federal privacy proposals are under consideration in the current session of Congress.

The collection and use of personal health data in the European Union had previously been governed by the provisions of the Data Protection Directive, which has been replaced by the European Union General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR. While the Data Protection Directive did not apply to organizations based outside the European Union, the GDPR has expanded its reach to include any business, regardless of its location, that provides goods or services to residents in the European Union. The GDPR imposes strict requirements on controllers and processors of personal data, including special protections for “sensitive information” which includes health and genetic information of data subjects. The GDPR also imposes strict rules on the transfer of personal data out of the European Union to the United States and other third countries. In addition, the GDPR provides that European Union member states may make their own further laws and regulations limiting the processing of personal data, including genetic, biometric or health data. The GDPR is a complex law and the regulatory guidance is still evolving, including with respect to how the GDPR should be applied in the context of clinical studies. Furthermore, some of the countries within the European Union are still in the process of drafting supplementary data protection legislation in key fields where the GDPR allows for national variation, including the fields of clinical study and other health-related information. These variations in the law may raise our costs of compliance and result in greater legal risks. Additionally, on July 16, 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union, or the CJEU, issued a landmark opinion in the case Maximilian Schrems vs. Facebook (Case C-311/18), called Schrems II. This decision calls into question certain data transfer mechanisms as between the European Union member states and the United States. The CJEU is the highest court in Europe and the Schrems II decision heightens the burden on the data exporters (transferring the data out of the European Union) as well as the data importers (the recipient of the data in the United States) to assess United States national security laws on their business and future actions of European Union data protection authorities are difficult to predict at the early date. Consequently, there is some risk of any such data transfers from the European Union being halted. Any contractual arrangements requiring the transfer of personal data from the European Union to us in the United States will require greater scrutiny and assessments as required under Schrems II and may have an adverse impact on cross-border transfers of personal data, or increase costs of compliance.

Since we are located in the European Union, we are subject to the GDPR. GDPR regulations have imposed additional responsibility and liability in relation to the personal data that we process and we may be required to put in place additional mechanisms to ensure compliance with the new data protection rules. This may be onerous and may interrupt or delay our development activities, and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Other jurisdictions outside the European Union are similarly introducing or enhancing privacy and data security laws, rules and regulations, which could increase our compliance costs and the risks associated with non-compliance. We cannot guarantee that we are, or will be, in compliance with all applicable international regulations as they are enforced now or as they evolve. For example, depending on the jurisdiction, our privacy policies may be insufficient to protect any personal information we collect, or may not comply with applicable laws, in which case we may be subject to regulatory enforcement actions, lawsuits or reputational damage, all of which may adversely affect our business. There is significant uncertainty related to the manner in which data protection authorities will seek to enforce compliance with the GDPR, especially with regard to clinical trial conduct. For example, it is not clear if the authorities will conduct random audits of companies doing business in the European Union, or if the authorities will wait for complaints to be filed by individuals who claim their rights have been violated. Enforcement uncertainty and the costs associated with ensuring GDPR compliance may be onerous and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. If we fail to comply with the GDPR and the applicable national data protection laws of the European Union member states, or if regulators assert we have failed to comply with these laws, it may lead to regulatory enforcement actions, which in a worst-case scenario can result in monetary penalties of up to $20,000,000 or up to 4% of the total worldwide annual revenue of the preceding financial year, whichever is higher, and other administrative penalties. If any of these events were to occur, our business and financial results could be significantly disrupted and adversely affected.

Although we take measures to protect sensitive data from unauthorized access, use or disclosure, our information technology and infrastructure may be vulnerable to attacks by hackers or viruses or breached due to employee error, malfeasance or other malicious or inadvertent disruptions. Any such breach or interruption could compromise our networks and the information stored there could be accessed by unauthorized parties, manipulated, publicly disclosed, lost or stolen. Any such access, breach or other loss of information could result in legal claims or proceedings, and liability under federal or state laws that protect the privacy of personal information, as well as regulatory penalties. In the United States, notice of breaches must be made to affected individuals and the United States Secretary of HHS, and for extensive breaches, notice may need to be made to the media or state Attorneys General. Such a notice could harm our reputation and our ability to compete. HHS has the discretion to impose penalties without attempting to resolve violations through informal means. In addition, state Attorneys General are authorized to bring civil actions seeking either injunctions or damages in response to violations that threaten the privacy of state residents. Although we have implemented security measures to prevent unauthorized access to patient data, such data is currently accessible through multiple channels, and there is no guarantee we can protect our data from breach. Unauthorized access, loss or dissemination could also damage our reputation or disrupt our operations, including our ability to conduct our analyses, deliver test results, process claims and appeals, provide customer assistance, conduct research and development activities, collect, process and prepare company financial information, provide information about our tests and other patient and physician education and outreach efforts through our website, and manage the administrative aspects of our business.

If we, our future partners or our third-party suppliers fail to comply with environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, we could become subject to fines or penalties or incur costs that could harm our business.

We and our future partners will become subject to numerous environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those governing laboratory procedures and the handling, use, storage, treatment and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes. Our operations and the operations of our future partners will involve the use of hazardous and flammable materials, including chemicals and biological materials. Our operations and the operations of our future partners also may produce hazardous waste products. We generally anticipate contracting with third parties for the disposal of these materials and wastes. We will not be able to eliminate the risk of contamination or injury from these materials. In the event of contamination or injury resulting from any use by us of hazardous materials, we could be held liable for any resulting damages, and any liability could exceed our resources. We also could incur significant costs associated with civil or criminal fines and penalties for failure to comply with such laws and regulations.

Although we maintain workers’ compensation insurance to cover us for costs and expenses we may incur due to injuries to our employees resulting from the use of hazardous materials, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities.

In addition, we may incur substantial costs in order to comply with current or future environmental, health and safety laws and regulations. These current or future laws and regulations may impair our research, development or production efforts. Our failure to comply with these laws and regulations also may result in substantial fines, penalties or other sanctions.

Our business operations and current and future relationships with investigators, healthcare professionals, consultants, third-party payors, patient organizations and customers will be subject to applicable healthcare regulatory laws, which could expose us to penalties.

Our business operations and the operations of our future partners and current and future arrangements with investigators, healthcare professionals, consultants, third-party payors, patient organizations and customers, may expose us to broadly applicable 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 our product candidates, if approved.

Ensuring that our internal operations and future business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices do not comply with current or future statutes, regulations, agency guidance or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations.

If any of the physicians or other providers or entities with whom we expect to do business were found to not be in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government-funded healthcare programs and imprisonment, which could affect our ability to operate our business. Further, defending against any such actions can be costly and time-consuming and may require significant 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.

General Risks Related to our Business

Our future success depends on our ability to retain key employees, consultants and advisors and to attract, retain and motivate qualified executive management and scientific personnel.

Our ability to compete in the highly competitive biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries depends upon our ability to attract and retain highly qualified managerial, scientific and medical personnel with capabilities and expertise in immuno-oncology and infectious diseases. We are highly dependent upon members of our management and scientific teams. We may not be able to retain these persons due to the competitive environment in the biotechnology industry. The loss of any of these persons’ services may adversely impact the achievement of our research, development, financing and commercialization objectives. We currently do not have “key person” insurance on any of our employees.

In addition, we rely on consultants, contractors and advisors, including scientific and clinical advisors, to assist us in formulating our research and development, regulatory approval and commercialization strategy. Our consultants and advisors may be employed by employers other than us and may have commitments under consulting or advisory contracts with other entities that may limit their availability to us. The loss of the services of one or more of our current employees or advisors might impede the achievement of our research, development, regulatory approval and commercialization objectives. In addition, we have flexibly grown our workforce through the use of contractors and part-time workers. We may not be able to retain the services of such personnel, which might result in delays in the operation of our business.

Recruiting and retaining other qualified employees, consultants and advisors for our business, including scientific and technical personnel, also will be critical to our success. Competition for skilled personnel, clinical operations, regulatory affairs, therapeutic area management and manufacturing, is intense and the turnover rate can be high. We may not be able to attract and retain personnel on favorable terms given the competition among numerous pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies and academic institutions for individuals with similar skill sets. In addition, adverse publicity, failure to succeed in pre-clinical studies or clinical trials or applications for marketing approval may make it more challenging to recruit and retain qualified personnel. The inability to recruit, or loss of services of certain executives, key employees, consultants or advisors, may impede the progress of our research, development and commercialization objectives and have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Product liability lawsuits against us could cause us to incur substantial liabilities and could limit commercialization of our current or future product candidates.

We face an inherent risk of product liability exposure related to the testing of any of our current or future product candidates in clinical trials, and we may face an even greater risk if any products derived from our product candidates are commercialized. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against claims that our product candidates caused injuries, we could incur substantial liabilities. Regardless of merit or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:

We carry clinical trial insurance, including product liability insurance, which we believe to be sufficient in light of the status of our current clinical programs; however, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses due to liability. If and when any products derived from our product candidates obtain regulatory approval, we intend to expand our insurance coverage; however, we may be unable to obtain product liability insurance on commercially reasonable terms or in adequate amounts. On occasion, large judgments have been awarded in class action lawsuits based on drugs or medical treatments that had unanticipated adverse effects. A successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against us could cause the price of the ADSs to decline and, if judgments exceed our insurance coverage, could adversely affect our results of operations and business.

If our products become subject to a product recall it could harm our reputation, business and financial results.

The FDA, the EMA and similar governmental authorities in other jurisdictions have the authority to require the recall of certain commercialized products. In the case of the FDA, the authority to require a recall of a biologic product must be based on an FDA finding that a batch, lot of other quantity of the biologic product presents an imminent or substantial hazard to the public health. For products developed using our AI platform technologies, a product recall may prevent other products derived from one or more of our product candidates using our AI platform technologies that target the same disease indication until we can demonstrate that the reason for any such product recall did not involve our technology. In addition, some governmental bodies outside the United States have the authority to require the recall of any product derived from one or more of our product candidates in the event of material deficiencies or defects in design or manufacture. Manufacturers may, under their own initiative, recall a product if any material deficiency in a product is found. A government-mandated or voluntary recall by us could occur as a result of manufacturing errors, design or labeling defects or other deficiencies and issues. Recalls of any of our product candidates would divert managerial and financial resources and have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. A recall announcement could harm our reputation with customers and negatively affect our sales, if any.

If we engage in future acquisitions, joint ventures, partnerships or collaborations, this may increase our capital requirements, dilute our shareholders, cause us to incur debt or assume contingent liabilities, and subject us to other risks. We may not realize the benefits of these acquisitions, joint ventures or collaborations.

We may evaluate various acquisitions and collaborations, including licensing or acquiring complementary products, intellectual property rights, technologies or businesses. Any potential acquisition, joint venture, partnerships or collaboration may entail numerous risks, including:

In addition, if we undertake acquisitions, we may utilize our cash, issue dilutive securities, assume or incur debt obligations, incur large one-time expenses and acquire intangible assets that could result in significant future amortization expense.

Moreover, we may not be able to locate suitable acquisition or collaboration opportunities and this inability could impair our ability to grow or obtain access to technology or products that may be important to the development of our business.

We may be adversely affected by global climate change or by legal, regulatory or market responses to such change.

Increasing stakeholder environmental, social and governance, or ESG, expectations, physical and transition risks associated with climate change, and emerging ESG regulation and policy requirements may pose risk to our market outlook, brand and reputation, financial outlook, cost of capital, global supply chain and production continuity, which may impact our ability to achieve our business objectives. Changes in environmental and climate change laws or regulations could lead to additional operational restrictions and compliance requirements upon us or our third -party providers or otherwise could negatively impact our business Physical impacts of climate change may drive increased costs to us and our suppliers and impact our continuity and data facilities.

Risks Related to Ownership of the ADSs

The price of the ADSs has been and may continue to be highly volatile and fluctuate substantially, which could result in substantial losses for purchasers of the ADSs who may not be able to resell the ADSs at or above the price they paid.

Since the closing of our IPO in February 2021 and our follow-on offering in November 2021, the market price of the ADSs has been and may continue to be highly volatile. The stock market in general, and the market for 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, ADS holders may not be able to resell the ADSs at or above the price they paid for our ADSs. The market price for the ADSs may be influenced by many factors, including, but not limited to:

If our quarterly or annual results fall below the expectations of investors or securities analysts, the price of the ADSs could decline substantially. Furthermore, any such fluctuations in our results may, in turn, cause the price of the ADSs to fluctuate substantially. We believe that period-to-period comparisons of our results are not necessarily meaningful and should not be relied upon as an indication of our future performance. In the past, following periods of volatility in the market price of a company’s securities, securities class action litigation often has been instituted against that company. Such litigation, if instituted against us, could cause us to incur substantial costs to defend such claims and divert management’s attention and resources, which could seriously harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

An active and liquid market for the ADSs and our ordinary shares may not be sustained, which could harm the market price of the ADSs.

Although the ADSs are listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market, an active trading market for the ADSs may not be sustained. In the absence of an active trading market for the ADSs, investors may not be able to sell their ADSs at the desired price or at the time that they would like to sell. In addition, the market price of the ADSs in our follow-on offering was based on the closing price of the ADSs at the time of such follow-on offering, there is no guarantee that such price will be free from challenge by our existing shareholders based on allegations that it does not reflect the “market price” at which we are required by our articles of association and Danish law to sell our ordinary shares. Any such shareholder challenge could be time consuming and costly and, if decided in a manner unfavorable to us, could result in liability to us and our directors, and could prevent any such offering from closing.

We have incurred and will continue to incur increased costs as a result of operating as a public company, and our management has been and will continue to be required to devote substantial time to compliance initiatives. We are subject to financial reporting and other requirements for which our accounting and other management systems and resources may not be adequately prepared. We may fail to comply with the rules that apply to public companies, including Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which could result in sanctions or other penalties that would harm the business.

As a public company, and particularly after we are no longer an “emerging growth company” as defined in the JOBS Act, we have incurred and will continue to incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. In addition, since becoming a public company as a result of our IPO in February 2021, the federal securities laws, including the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and rules subsequently implemented by the SEC and The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, or Nasdaq, have imposed various requirements on our company, including requirements to file annual and event-driven reports with respect to our business and financial condition, and to establish and maintain effective disclosure and financial controls and corporate governance practices. Our management and other personnel have devoted and will continue to devote a substantial amount of time to these compliance initiatives. Moreover, these rules and regulations have increased and will continue to increase our legal and financial compliance costs and will make some activities more time-consuming and costly. For example, these rules and regulations have made it more difficult and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance. We may not be able to produce reliable financial statements or file these financial statements as part of a periodic report in a timely manner with the SEC or comply with Nasdaq listing requirements. In addition, we could make errors in our financial statements that could require us to restate our financial statements.

Pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, or Section 404, we are required to furnish a report in connection with issuing our annual financial statements as of and for the year ending December 31, 2021 by our management on our internal control over financial reporting, and may be required to provide the attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm. However, while we remain an emerging growth company, we will not be required to include an attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm in our annual filings with the SEC. To achieve compliance with Section 404 within the prescribed period, we have been and will continue to be engaged in a process to document and evaluate our internal control over financial reporting, which is both costly and challenging. In this regard, we will need to continue to dedicate internal resources, potentially engage outside consultants, and adopt a detailed work plan to assess and document the adequacy of internal control over financial reporting, continue steps to improve control processes as appropriate, validate through testing that controls are functioning as documented, and implement a continuous reporting and improvement process for internal control over financial reporting. Despite our efforts, there is a risk that neither we nor our independent registered public accounting firm will be able to conclude within the prescribed timeframe that our internal control over financial reporting is effective as required by Section 404. This could result in an adverse reaction in the financial markets due to a loss of confidence in the reliability of our financial statements.

In July 2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, or the Dodd-Frank Act, was enacted. There are significant corporate governance and executive compensation related provisions in the Dodd-Frank Act. Recent legislation permits emerging growth companies to implement many of these requirements over a longer period and up to five years from the last day of the fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of the closing of our IPO in February 2021 (December 31, 2026). We intend to take advantage of this new legislation but cannot guarantee that we will not be required to implement these requirements sooner than budgeted or planned and thereby incur unexpected expenses. Shareholder 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. Our management and other personnel have devoted and will continue to devote a substantial amount of time to these compliance initiatives.

We are an “emerging growth company” and the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging growth companies may make our ordinary shares and the ADSs less attractive to investors.

We are an “emerging growth company” under the JOBS Act, and we will remain an emerging growth company until the earlier of:

We may choose to take advantage of some, but not all, of the available exemptions. We have taken advantage of reduced reporting burdens in this Form 20-F. In particular, we have not included all of the executive compensation information that would be required if we were not an emerging growth company. We cannot predict whether investors will find the ADSs less attractive if we rely on certain or all of these exemptions. If some investors find the ADSs less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for the ADSs and the price per ADS may be more volatile.

In addition, the JOBS Act provides that an emerging growth company may 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 certain accounting standards until those standards would otherwise apply to private companies. Such provisions are only applicable under U.S. GAAP. As a result, we will adopt new or revised accounting standards on the relevant dates on which adoption of such standards is required or permitted by the IASB.

As a “foreign private issuer,” we are exempt from a number of rules under the United States securities laws, as well as Nasdaq rules, and we are permitted to file less information with the SEC than are domestic United States issuers. This may limit the information available to holders of the ADSs and may make our ordinary shares and the ADSs less attractive to investors.

We qualify as a foreign private issuer. As a result, in accordance with the listing requirements of The Nasdaq Capital Market, we rely on home country governance requirements and certain exemptions thereunder rather than relying on the corporate governance requirements of The Nasdaq Capital Market. For instance, the Listing Rules for The Nasdaq Stock Market, or The Nasdaq Listing Rules, for domestic United States issuers require listed companies to have, among other things, a majority of their board members be independent, and to have independent director oversight of executive compensation, nomination of board members and corporate governance matters. As a foreign private issuer, however, while we intend to comply with these requirements, we are permitted to follow home country practice in lieu of the above requirements. Danish law does not require that a majority of our board consist of independent directors or the implementation of a remuneration committee or nominating and corporate governance committee, and our board may thus in the future not include, or include fewer, independent directors than would be required if we were subject to The Nasdaq Listing Rules, or they may decide that it is in our interest not to have a remuneration committee or nominating and corporate governance committee, or have such committees governed by practices that would not comply with Nasdaq Listing Rules. Since a majority of our board of directors may not consist of independent directors if we decide to rely on the foreign private issuer exemption to The Nasdaq Listing Rules, our board’s approach may, therefore, be different from that of a board with a majority of independent directors, and as a result, the management oversight of our company could, in the future, be more limited than if we were subject to the Nasdaq Listing Rules. We intend to follow home country practice with regard to, among other things, quorum requirements generally applicable to general meetings of shareholders.

Furthermore, Danish law does not have a regulatory regime for the solicitation of proxies and the solicitation of proxies is not a generally accepted business practice in Denmark, thus our practice varies from the requirement of Nasdaq Listing Rule 5620(b).

Due to the above exemptions for foreign private issuers, our shareholders will not be afforded the same protections or information generally available to investors holding shares in public companies organized in the United States, some investors may find the ADSs less attractive as a result, and there may be a less active trading market for the ADSs.

We qualify as a foreign private issuer and, as a result, we will not be subject to United States proxy rules and will be subject to Exchange Act reporting obligations that, to some extent, are more lenient and less frequent than those of a United States domestic public company.

We report under the Exchange Act, as a non-United States company with foreign private issuer status. Because we qualify as a foreign private issuer under the Exchange Act and although we are subject to Danish laws and regulations with regard to such matters and intend to furnish quarterly financial information to the SEC, we are exempt from certain provisions of the Exchange Act that are applicable to United States domestic public companies, including (i) the sections of the Exchange Act regulating the solicitation of proxies, consents or authorizations in respect of a security registered under the Exchange Act; (ii) the sections of the Exchange Act requiring insiders to file public reports of their stock ownership and trading activities and liability for insiders who profit from trades made in a short period of time; and (iii) the rules under the Exchange Act requiring the filing with the SEC of quarterly reports on Form 10-Q containing unaudited financial and other specified information, or current reports on Form 8-K, upon the occurrence of specified significant events. In addition, foreign private issuers are not required to file their annual report on Form 20-F until four months after the end of each fiscal year, while United States domestic issuers depending on their size are required to file their annual report on Form 10-K within 60 or 90 days after the end of each fiscal year. Foreign private issuers are also exempt from the Regulation Fair Disclosure, aimed at preventing issuers from making selective disclosures of material information. As a result of the above, our shareholders and the holders of the ADSs may not have the same protections afforded to shareholders of companies that are not foreign private issuers.

Our status as a “foreign private issuer” allows us to adopt IFRS accounting principles, which are different than accounting principles under U.S. GAAP.

We have adopted and presented our financial statements in accordance with IFRS as issued by the IASB. IFRS is an internationally recognized body of accounting principles that are used by many companies outside of the United States to prepare their financial statements; and the SEC recently permitted foreign private issuers such as our company to prepare and file their financial statements in accordance with IFRS rather than U.S. GAAP. IFRS accounting principles are different from those of U.S. GAAP, and SEC rules do not require us to provide a reconciliation of IFRS accounting principles to those of U.S. GAAP. Persons who are not familiar with IFRS may misunderstand certain information presented in our financial statements. Accordingly, we suggest that readers of our financial statements familiarize themselves with the provisions of IFRS accounting principles in order to better understand the differences between these two sets of principles.

We may lose our foreign private issuer status, which would then require us to comply with the Exchange Act’s domestic reporting regime and cause us to incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses.

We qualify as a foreign private issuer and therefore we are not required to comply with all of the periodic disclosure and current reporting requirements of the Exchange Act applicable to United States domestic issuers. If we cease to be a foreign private issuer, which is measured as of the end of our second fiscal quarter in each fiscal year after the completion of our IPO, we will be required to comply with all of the periodic disclosure and current reporting requirements of the Exchange Act applicable to United States domestic issuers as of January 1 of the following year. In order to maintain our current status as a foreign private issuer, either (a) a majority of our ordinary shares or ADSs must be either directly or indirectly owned of record by non-residents of the United States or (b)(i) a majority of our executive management or directors may not be United States citizens or residents, (ii) more than 50% of our assets cannot be located in the United States and (iii) our business must not be administered principally inside the United States. If we lost this status, we would be required to comply with the Exchange Act reporting and other requirements applicable to United States domestic issuers, which are more detailed and extensive than the requirements for foreign private issuers. We may also be required to make changes in our corporate governance practices in accordance with various SEC and Nasdaq rules. The regulatory and compliance costs to us under United States securities laws if we are required to comply with the reporting requirements applicable to a United States domestic issuer may be significantly higher than the cost we would incur as a foreign private issuer. As a result, we expect that a loss of foreign private issuer status would increase our legal and financial compliance costs and would make some activities highly time consuming and costly. We also expect that if we were required to comply with the rules and regulations applicable to United States domestic issuers, it would make it more difficult and expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, and we may be required to accept reduced coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain coverage. These rules and regulations could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified members of our board of directors.

Holders of the ADSs may be subject to certain limitations on the transfer of the ADSs and the withdrawal of the underlying ordinary shares.

Our ADSs, which may be evidenced by American Depositary Receipts, or ADRs, are transferable on the books of the depositary. However, the depositary may close its books at any time or from time to time when it deems expedient in connection with the performance of its duties. The depositary may refuse to deliver, transfer or register transfers of the ADSs generally when our books or the books of the depositary are closed, or at any time if we or the depositary think it is advisable to do so because of any requirement of law, government or governmental body, or under any provision of the deposit agreement, or for any other reason subject to a holder’s right to cancel the ADSs and withdraw the underlying ordinary shares. Temporary delays in the cancellation of the ADSs and withdrawal of the underlying ordinary shares may arise because the depositary has closed its transfer books or we have closed our transfer books, the transfer of ordinary shares is blocked to permit voting at a shareholders’ meeting or we are paying a dividend on our ordinary shares. In addition, holders of ADSs may not be able to cancel the ADSs and withdraw the underlying ordinary shares when such holder owes money for fees, taxes and similar charges and when it is necessary to prohibit withdrawals in order to comply with any laws or governmental regulations that apply to ADSs or to the withdrawal of ordinary shares or other deposited securities. See “Item 12D. Description of Securities Other than Equity Securities.”

A significant portion of our total outstanding ordinary shares may be sold in the near future. The large number of shares eligible for sale or subject to rights requiring us to register them for sale could cause the market price of the ADSs to drop significantly, even if our business is performing well.

Sales of a substantial number of ordinary shares or the ADSs could occur at any time. These sales, or the perception in the market that holders of a large number of shares intend to sell shares, could reduce the market price of the ADSs. We had 23,203,828 ordinary shares outstanding as of December 31, 2021.

On April 6, 2021, we filed a registration statement on Form S-8 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, to register a total of 4,808,076 ordinary shares, representing all ordinary shares issued or issuable under our equity incentive scheme pursuant to the Appendices to our Articles of Association. Such Form S-8 registration statement automatically became effective upon filing. Accordingly, shares registered under such registration statement are available for sale in the open market following the expiration of the applicable lock-up period.

As of December 31 2021, there were 2,732,618 warrants outstanding. If these warrants are exercised then an additional 2,732,618 ordinary shares will become eligible for sale in the public market to the extent permitted by the provisions of various vesting schedules and Rule 144 and Rule 701 under the Securities Act. If these additional ordinary shares are sold, or if it is perceived that they will be sold, in the public market, the trading price of the ADSs could decline. Any sales of securities by these security holders could have a negative effect on the trading price of our ordinary shares and ADSs. In addition, as of December 31, 2021, there were 351,036 warrants issued to EIB under the loan agreement with EIB, which are expected to be cash settled. For a more detailed description of the EIB warrants see the section herein entitled “Our EIB warrants.”

Additionally, on November 28, 2021, we entered into a Share Sale and Restriction Agreement with, Dr. Lars Staal Wegner, our Chief Executive Officer, Dr. Niels Iversen Møller our Co-Founder, Chief Business Officer and interim Chief Financial Officer and Andreas Mattsson, our Co-Founder and Chief Innovation Officer, pursuant to which Dr. Wegner agreed to exercise 211,849 warrants in each of the two week exercise windows established under our Articles of Association that are expected to open two trading days following publication of our annual report and interim quarterly financial reports in March 2022, May 2022, August 2022 and November 2022, respectively.

Under the terms of this agreement, Dr. Wegner, Dr. Møller and Mr. Mattson further agreed with us that in the corresponding open trading window related to each such exercise consisting of the four-week period commencing on the third full trading day after the date of publication of our annual report or interim financial reports in March 2022, May 2022, August 2022 and November 2022, each a Trading Window, Dr. Wegner would sell such Ordinary Shares and Dr. Møller and Mr. Mattson will purchase such ordinary shares, with each of Dr. Møller and Mr. Mattson purchasing fifty per cent (50%) of such shares, at a purchase price per share equal to the Volume Weighted Average Price, or VWAP, of our ADSs at the close of the market on the date of exercise as reported on Nasdaq.

Under the terms of the agreement, Dr. Møller and Mr. Mattson agreed that during each Trading Window each of them will sell 328,731 ADSs representing Ordinary Shares at a price equal to the prevailing market price thereof on the date of such sale as reported on Nasdaq. Furthermore, pursuant the terms of the agreement, Dr. Møller and Mr. Mattson are required to sell such shares and are prohibited from exercising any subsequent influence over how, when, or whether to effect the trade(s).

Sales of ADSs or our ordinary shares as restrictions end or pursuant to the above described agreement or pursuant to registration rights may make it more difficult for us to finance our operations through the sale of equity securities in the future at a time and at a price that we deem appropriate. These sales also could cause the trading price of the ADSs to fall and make it more difficult for holders of ADSs to sell the ADSs.

Holders of the ADSs are not treated as shareholders of our company and will not have the same voting rights as our shareholders, which may affect the value of the ADSs.

Holders of ADSs are not treated as our shareholders unless they withdraw the ordinary shares underlying the ADSs from the depositary, which is the holder of the ordinary shares underlying the ADSs. Holders of ADSs, therefore, do not have any rights as shareholders of our company, other than the rights that they have pursuant to the deposit agreement. As such, holders of ADSs will not be able to directly vote underlying ordinary shares. Holders of ADSs may instruct the depositary how to vote the ordinary shares underlying their ADSs. If we ask it to, the depositary will send out information about shareholder meetings and solicit voting instructions and will try to carry out voting instructions it receives. However, we are not required to instruct the depositary to take

action with respect to shareholder meetings. If we do not do so, holders of the ADSs can still send voting instructions to the depositary and the depositary may try to carry out those instructions, but it is not required to do so. Holders of the ADSs may not become aware of shareholder meetings if the depositary does not send out information. Even if the depositary does solicit voting instructions, holders of ADSs may not receive the information in time. As a result of these factors, holders of ADSs may not be able to effectively exercise voting rights that they would have if they held our ordinary shares directly.

If we issue new ordinary shares or sell ADSs in future financings, holders of ADSs may experience immediate dilution and, as a result, the price of the ADSs may decline.

We may from time-to-time issue additional ordinary shares or sell ADSs at a discount from the current trading price of our ordinary shares or ADSs. As a result, holders of ADSs could experience further immediate dilution upon the issuance of any ordinary shares or ADSs sold at such discount. In addition, as opportunities present themselves, we may enter into financing or similar arrangements in the future, including the issuance of debt securities, ordinary shares or ADSs. If we issue ordinary shares or securities convertible or exchangeable into ordinary shares, such as ADSs, holders of the ADSs could experience additional dilution and, as a result, the price of the ADSs may decline.

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

We may seek additional capital through a combination of public and private equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations and licensing arrangements. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or debt securities, our existing shareholders’ ownership interest will be diluted and the terms may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect our existing shareholders’ rights as a holder of ADSs. The incurrence of indebtedness would result in increased fixed payment obligations and could involve restrictive covenants, such as imitations on our ability to incur additional debt, limitations on our ability to acquire or license intellectual property rights and other operating restrictions that could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business. If we raise additional funds through collaborations and licensing arrangements with third parties or through asset sales, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our technologies or product candidates, or grant licenses on terms unfavorable to us.

Investors should be aware that the rights provided to our shareholders under Danish corporate law and our articles of association differ in certain respects from the rights that you would typically enjoy as a shareholder of a United States company under applicable United States federal and state laws.

Under Danish corporate law, except in certain limited circumstances (which require as a minimum that a proposal for inspection has been supported by a minimum of 25% of the shareholders voting and being present at a general meeting), our shareholders may not ask for an inspection of our corporate records, while under Delaware corporate law any shareholder, irrespective of the size of such shareholder’s shareholdings, may do so. Shareholders of a Danish limited liability company are also unable to initiate a derivative action, a remedy typically available to shareholders of United States companies, in order to enforce a right of our company, in case we fail to enforce such right ourselves, other than in certain cases of director/management liability under limited circumstances. In addition, a majority of our shareholders may release a director or manager from any claim of liability we may have, including if such director or manager has acted in bad faith, negligently or fraudulently. However, a shareholder may bring a derivative action on behalf of our company against, among other persons, a director or manager, provided that the circumstances of the act or omission giving rise to the claim of liability was not known to the shareholder at the time of such shareholder resolution, or if shareholders representing at least 10% of the share capital represented at the relevant general meeting have opposed such shareholder resolution. In contrast, most United States federal and state laws prohibit a company or its shareholders from releasing a director from liability altogether if such director has acted in bad faith or has breached such director’s duty of loyalty to our company. Additionally, distribution of dividends from Danish companies to foreign companies and individuals can be eligible for non-refundable withholding tax, and not all receiving countries allow for deduction. Also, the rights as a creditor may not be as strong under Danish insolvency law, as under United States law or other insolvency law, and consequently creditors may recover less in the event our company is subject to insolvency compared to a similar case including a United States debtor. In addition, the use of the tax asset consisting of the accumulated tax deficit requires that we are able to generate positive taxable income and can be restricted by future amendments to Danish tax law. Finally, Danish corporate law may not provide appraisal rights in the case of a business combination equivalent to those generally afforded a shareholder of a United States company under applicable United States laws. As a result of these differences between Danish corporate law and our articles of association, on the one hand, and United States federal and state laws, on the other hand, in certain instances, holders of the ADSs could receive less protection as an shareholder of our company than such holders would as a shareholder of a United States company.

Holders of our ordinary shares or ADSs may not be able to exercise their pre-emptive subscription rights and may suffer dilution of their shareholding in the event of future issuances of our ordinary shares.

Under the Danish Companies Act, our shareholders benefit from a pre-emptive subscription right on the issuance of ordinary shares for cash consideration only and not in the event of issuance of shares against non-cash contribution or debt conversion. Even the shareholders’ pre-emptive subscription rights in the event of issuances of shares against cash payment may be disapplied by a resolution of the shareholders at a general meeting of our shareholders and/or the shares or ADSs may be issued on the basis of an authorization granted to the board of directors pursuant to which the board may disapply the shareholders’ pre-emptive subscription rights. Such shares or ADSs may be issued at market value as well as by way of incorporation of available reserves (including premium). In addition, a shareholder may not be able to exercise the shareholder’s pre-emptive right on a timely basis or at all, unless the shareholder complies with the Danish Companies Act and applicable laws in the jurisdiction in which the shareholder is resident. Furthermore, the use of pre-emptive subscription rights in relation to future capital increases in our company can be restricted for United States residents according to United States securities law. As a result, the ownership interest of shareholders or ADS holders may be materially diluted in the event shares or ADSs are issued in the future. Shares or ADSs may be issued at a discount to market price in rights offerings provided that the resolution is approved by two-thirds of the votes cast and the share capital represented at the general meeting and in these cases a restriction on the ability to exercise pre-emptive rights may materially dilute the value of the ordinary shares or ADSs held by the shareholder or ADS holder in question.

Our shareholders have authorized our board of directors to issue securities, including in connection with (i) issues of new ordinary shares with preemptive rights for our existing shareholders at market price or at a discount price against cash payment, (ii) issues of new ordinary shares without preemptive rights for our existing shareholders at market price or at a discount price against cash payment, (iii) issues of warrants without preemptive rights for our existing shareholders at market price or at a discount price against cash payment, and (iv) issues of convertible bonds without preemptive rights for our existing shareholders at market price against cash payment. The absence of pre-emptive rights for existing shareholders may cause dilution to such holders.

However, holders of the ADSs in the United States will not be entitled to exercise or sell pre-emptive subscription rights related to their ordinary shares, unless we register the pre-emptive subscription rights and the securities to which the pre-emptive subscription rights relate under the Securities Act or an exemption from the registration requirements is available. In addition, the deposit agreement provides that the depositary will not make rights available to ADS holders unless both the rights and any related securities are either registered under the Securities Act or exempted from registration under the Securities Act.

Holders of ADSs may not receive distributions on our ordinary shares represented by the ADSs or any value for them.

If we offer holders of our ordinary shares the option to receive dividends in either cash or shares, under the deposit agreement the depositary may require satisfactory assurances from us that extending the offer to holders of ADSs does not require registration of any securities under the Securities Act before making the option available to holders of ADSs. We are under no obligation to file a registration statement with respect to any such rights or securities or to endeavor to cause such a registration statement to be declared effective. Moreover, we may not be able to establish an exemption from registration under the Securities Act. Accordingly, ADS holders may be unable to participate in our rights offerings or to elect to receive dividends in shares and may experience dilution in their holdings. In addition, if the depositary is unable to sell rights that are not exercised or not distributed or if the sale is not lawful or reasonably practicable, it will allow the rights to lapse, in which case ADS holders will receive no value for these rights.

United States holders of ADSs may suffer adverse tax consequences if we are characterized as a passive foreign investment company.

A non-United States corporation will be classified as a passive foreign investment company, or PFIC, for United States federal income tax purposes for any taxable year, if either (i) 75% or more of its gross income for such year consists of certain types of “passive” income or (ii) 50% or more of the value of its assets (determined on the basis of a quarterly average) during such year produce or are held for the production of passive income. Passive income generally includes dividends, interest, royalties, rents, annuities, net gains from the sale or exchange of property producing such income and net foreign currency gains. In addition, a non-United States corporation will be treated as owning its proportionate share of the assets and earning its proportionate share of the income of any other corporation in which it owns, directly or indirectly, more than 25% (by value) of the stock. We do not believe we were a PFIC for United States federal income tax purposes for the taxable year ended December 31, 2021. PFIC status is based on our income, assets and activities for the entire taxable year, which we expect may vary substantially over time, and therefore, it is not possible to determine whether we will be characterized as a PFIC for any taxable year until after the close of the applicable taxable year. Moreover, we must determine our PFIC status annually based on tests that are factual in nature, and our status for the taxable year ending December 31, 2022 and in future years will depend on our income, assets and activities in each of those years. There can be no assurance that we will not be considered a PFIC for any taxable year. If we were to be or become a PFIC for any taxable year during which a United States holder (defined below in “Taxation – Certain Material United States Federal Income Tax Considerations”) holds ADSs, certain adverse United States federal income tax consequences could apply to such United States holder. See “Taxation – Certain Material United States Federal Income Tax Considerations – Passive Foreign Investment Company Considerations.”

The Danish tax treatment of ADSs by the Danish tax authorities is uncertain.

The specific treatment of ADSs under Danish tax law is highly uncertain and not codified in law. The interpretation by the Danish tax authorities may have adverse effects on the taxation of investors. In the tax description contained herein we are assuming that the ADSs are to be treated as ordinary unlisted shares for Danish tax purposes. However, recent communications from the Danish tax authorities indicate that a holder of ADSs may not be treated as holding unlisted shares in the company for Danish tax purposes. In the event that the holders of ADSs are not treated as holding unlisted shares in the company, it is likely that they will be treated as either holding listed shares or financial instruments for Danish tax purposes, which will impact the Danish tax treatment of the ADS holders, including in respect of the taxation of dividends paid to ADS holders. Furthermore, the communications from the Danish tax authorities indicate if the holders of ADS are not treated as holders of shares in the Danish company, then the depository bank may be considered the holder of the ordinary shares in the company for Danish tax purposes.

Claims of United States civil liabilities may not be enforceable against us.

We are incorporated under the laws of Denmark. Substantially all of our assets are located outside the United States. A number of our directors and the majority of our officers and employees reside outside the United States. As a result, it may not be possible for investors to effect service of process within the United States upon such persons or to enforce against them or us in United States courts, including judgments predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the securities laws of the United States.

The United States and Denmark currently do not have a treaty providing for the reciprocal recognition and enforcement of judgments, other than arbitration awards, in civil and commercial matters. Consequently, a final judgment for payment given by a court in the United States, whether or not predicated solely upon United States securities laws, would not automatically be recognized or enforceable in Denmark. In order to obtain a judgment which is enforceable in Denmark, the party in whose favor a final and conclusive judgment of the United States court has been rendered will be required to file its claim with a court of competent jurisdiction in Denmark. Such party may submit to the Danish court the final judgment rendered by the United States court. If and to the extent that the Danish court finds that the jurisdiction of the United States court has been based on grounds which are internationally acceptable and that proper legal procedures have been observed, the Danish court should, in principle, give binding effect to the judgment of the United States court, unless such judgment contravenes principles of public policy of Denmark. Danish courts are likely to deny the recognition and enforcement of punitive damages or other awards. Moreover, a Danish court may reduce the amount of damages granted by a United States court and recognize damages only to the extent that they are necessary to compensate actual losses or damages. Enforcement and recognition of judgments of United States courts in Denmark are solely governed by the provisions of the Danish Administration of Justice Act.

Based on the lack of a treaty as described above, United States investors may not be able to enforce against us or members of our board of directors, our executive board, our executive management or certain experts named herein who are residents of Denmark or countries other than the United States any judgments obtained in United States courts in civil and commercial matters, including judgments under the United States federal securities laws.

We may fail to meet our publicly announced guidance or other expectations about our business, which could cause the market value of our ADSs to decline significantly.

We may provide from time to time guidance regarding our expected financial and business performance. Correctly identifying key factors affecting business conditions and predicting future events is inherently an uncertain process, and our guidance may not ultimately be accurate in all respects. Our guidance is based on certain assumptions, such as those relating to anticipated production and sales volumes, average sales prices, supplier and commodity costs, and planned cost reductions. If our guidance varies from actual results, the market value of the ADSs could decline significantly.

If securities analysts do not publish research or reports about our business or if they publish negative evaluations of the ADSs, the market price of the ADSs and their trading volume could decline.

The trading market for the ADSs will rely, in part, on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our business. If no or only limited securities or industry analysts cover our company, the trading price for the ADSs would be negatively impacted. If any of the analysts who cover us downgrades our equity securities or issues an adverse or misleading opinion regarding us, our business model, our intellectual property or our stock performance, or if our clinical trials and operating results fail to meet the expectations of analysts, the market price of the ADSs would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts cease to cover the ADSs, or downgrades our securities, we could lose visibility in the market for the ADSs, which in turn could cause the market price of the ADSs to decline or their trading volume to decline.

Our principal shareholders and executive management own a significant percentage of our ordinary shares and will be able to exert significant control over matters subject to shareholder approval.

As of December 31, 2021, our executive management, directors, holders of 5% or more of our ordinary shares and their respective affiliates beneficially own 42% of our outstanding voting securities. As a result, these security holders will have the ability either alone or voting together as a group to determine and/or significantly influence the outcome of matters submitted to our shareholders for approval, including the election and removal of directors, payment of dividends, amendments to our articles of association, including changes to our share capital or any mergers, demergers, liquidations and similar transactions. This may prevent or discourage unsolicited acquisition proposals or offers for our ordinary shares or ADSs that holders of ADSs may feel are in their best interest as a holder of ADSs. In addition, this group of shareholders may have the ability to control our management and affairs. Such control and concentration of ownership may affect the market price of the ADSs and may discourage certain types of transactions, including those involving actual or potential change of control of us (whether through merger, consolidation, take-over or other business combination), which might otherwise have a positive effect on the market price of the ADSs.

We have broad discretion in the use of our cash, cash equivalents and investments, including the funds raised from our follow-on offering and our IPO, and we may not use them effectively.

Our management will have broad discretion in the application of our cash, cash equivalents and investments, including the funds raised from our follow-on offering and our IPO, and could spend these funds in ways that do not improve our results of operations or enhance the value of our ordinary shares. The failure by our management to apply these funds effectively could result in financial losses that could have a material adverse impact on our business, cause the market price of the ADSs to decline, and delay the development of our product candidates. Pending their use, we may invest our cash, cash equivalents and investments, including the funds raised from our follow-on offering and our IPO, in a manner that does not produce income or that loses value.

We may not have sufficient funds available to pay amounts due and owing European Investment Bank upon the exercise of certain warrants and may be required to use a portion of the proceeds from funds raised from the follow-on offering or our IPO to make such payments.

In August 2020, we executed a loan agreement, or the EIB Loan Agreement, with the European Investment Bank, or EIB, for a principal amount of €20.0 million, divided into three tranches of tranche 1 in the amount of €7.0 million, tranche 2 in the amount of €6.0 million and tranche 3 in the amount of €7.0 million, or the EIB Loan. Under the EIB Loan Agreement, the EIB Loan tranche balances are due six years from their respective disbursement dates. In connection with disbursement of each tranche, EIB is entitled to receive certain warrants, or the EIB Warrants. In November 2020, we initiated the process to receive the funds from the disbursement of tranche 1 of the EIB Loan in the aggregate amount of €7.0 million but due to the timing of the IPO we did not finalize a disbursement offer. In connection therewith, EIB received 351,036 EIB Warrants, which vested immediately, pursuant to the terms of a separate warrant agreement, or the EIB Warrant Agreement. As of December 31, 2021, we initiated the draw down of the first tranche of the EIB Loan Agreement amounting to €7.0 million. The Company received the first tranche of €7.0 million on February 17, 2022.

Under Article 18, Paragraph 2 of the Statute of the European Investment Bank, or the EIB Statute, establishing EIB, a direct equity investment by EIB requires a separate authorization from the EIB Board of Governors pursuant to which the EIB Board of Directors, acting by qualified majority, has to establish the terms and conditions of such direct equity investment. Under the EIB Statute, in the absence of a separate authorization from the EIB Board of Governors, commercial shareholdings financed from EIB’s own resources are not allowed. Since the EIB Loan is being made from EIB’s own resources, the EIB Statute does not allow EIB to acquire any of our ordinary shares, therefore, we fully expect that if and when EIB exercises the EIB Warrants, it will do so on either a net cash settlement basis at a price equal to the market price on the date of exercise thereof, or by means of exercising its right to cause us to purchase the EIB Warrants at a purchase price equal to the volume weighted average price per ordinary share, or VWAP, for a period of six months following the exercise of such Put Right. In the first six months following the completion of our IPO that occurred in February 2021, the VWAP price to be paid by us is calculated for the entire period from the completion of our IPO until the exercise of the Put Right. Since we fully expect the EIB Warrants to be cash settled, we do not expect them to affect our share capital at any time. However, since the amount of cash that we will need in order to meet our obligations to pay the amounts due and payable to EIB upon the exercise of the EIB Warrants is based on valuations to be determined in the future and, therefore, cannot be determined as of the date of this Form 20-F, we may not have sufficient funds on hand to pay such amounts in which case we may be required to use a portion of the funds raised from our follow-on offering and/or our IPO for such payments. For a more detailed discussion of the terms of the EIB Warrants see the section herein entitled “Description of Share Capital  –  Our EIB Warrants.”

Because we do not currently pay cash dividends on our ordinary shares and do not anticipate doing so in the foreseeable future, capital appreciation, if any, will be the sole source of gain on investments in the ADSs.

Currently, we do not have any plans to declare or pay cash dividends on our ordinary shares. Our intention is to retain all future earnings, if any, to finance the growth and development of the business. Additionally, the terms of any future debt agreements may preclude dividend payments. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, on the ADSs will be the sole source of gain for the foreseeable future.

You may be subject to limitations on surrenders of the ADSs and the withdrawal of the underlying shares.

Temporary delays in the cancellation of the ADSs and withdrawal of the underlying shares may arise because the depositary has closed its books or we have closed our transfer books, the transfer of shares is blocked to permit voting at a shareholders’ meeting or we are paying a dividend on our shares. In addition, you may not be able to cancel the ADSs and withdraw the underlying shares when you owe money for fees, taxes and similar charges and when it is necessary to prohibit withdrawals in order to comply with any laws or governmental regulations that apply to ADSs or to the withdrawal of shares or other deposited securities. See “Description of American Depositary Shares.”

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 biopharmaceutical companies have experienced significant price volatility in recent years. If we face such litigation, it could result in substantial costs and a diversion of management’s attention and resources, which could harm our business.

ADS holders may not be entitled to a jury trial with respect to claims arising under the deposit agreement or relating to our ordinary shares or the ADSs, which could result in less favorable outcomes to the plaintiffs in an action of that kind.

The deposit agreement governing the ADSs representing our ordinary shares provides that, to the fullest extent permitted by law, ADS holders waive the right to a jury trial of any claim they may have against us or the depositary arising out of or relating to our ordinary shares, the ADSs or the deposit agreement, including any claim under United States federal securities laws.

If we or the depositary opposed a jury trial demand based on the waiver, the court would determine whether the waiver was enforceable based on the facts and circumstances of that case in accordance with the applicable state and federal law. To our knowledge, the enforceability of a contractual pre-dispute jury trial waiver in connection with claims arising under the federal securities laws has not been finally adjudicated by the United States Supreme Court. However, we believe that a contractual pre-dispute jury trial waiver provision is generally enforceable, including under the laws of the State of New York, which govern the deposit agreement, by a federal or state court in the City of New York, which has non-exclusive jurisdiction over matters arising under the deposit agreement. In determining whether to enforce a contractual pre-dispute jury trial waiver provision, courts will generally consider whether a party knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waived the right to a jury trial. We believe that this is the case with respect to the deposit agreement and the ADSs. It is advisable that holders of ADSs consult legal counsel regarding the jury waiver provision before entering into the deposit agreement.

If you or any other ADS holders bring a claim against us or the depositary in connection with matters arising under the deposit agreement or relating to the ADSs, including claims under federal securities laws, you may not be entitled to a jury trial with respect to such claims, which may have the effect of limiting and discouraging lawsuits against us or the depositary. If a lawsuit is brought against us or the depositary under the deposit agreement, it may be heard only by a judge or justice of the applicable trial court, which would be conducted according to different civil procedures and may result in different outcomes than a trial by jury would have had, including results that could be less favorable to the plaintiffs in that action.

Nevertheless, if this jury trial waiver provision is not permitted by applicable law, an action could proceed under the terms of the deposit agreement with a jury trial.

No condition, stipulation or provision of the deposit agreement or the ADSs serves as a waiver by any ADS holder or by us or the depositary of compliance with any substantive provision of the United States federal securities laws and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder.

​

Item 4.Information on the Company

4.A. Business Overview

General

We are a clinical-stage AI-immunology™ platform company using our proprietary artificial intelligence, or AI, technology, engineering expertise and drug development know-how to simulate the human immune system and generate predictive models to identify and develop novel immunotherapies for the treatment of various cancers, bacterial diseases and viral infections. Drug discovery and clinical development using historically prevailing techniques is a long, costly process with a high attrition rate. We believe our proprietary AI-immunology platforms, trained to translate vast amounts of data into a deep understanding of biological processes in the human body, can be harnessed to rapidly and cost effectively design and develop unique immunotherapies, thereby potentially revolutionizing the process of drug discovery and development. In an effort to validate the predictive power and scalability of our AI platforms, we have identified and are developing a pipeline of clinical product candidates initially focused in the areas of immuno-oncology and infectious disease. We are currently in the clinic with our two lead product candidates, EVX-01 and EVX-02, for the treatment of various cancers.

We will own all data (including raw data) and results generated from the clinical trial other than data related to Sample Testing Results, Joint Clinical Data or MSD Clinical Data, as those terms are defined in the Merck CTCSA, a copy of which is filed as Exhibit 99.2 to Form 6-K filed with the SEC on October 25, 2021.

Under the terms of the Merck CTCSA, MSD may terminate the agreement in the event it believes that its compound is being used unsafely. Either we or MSD may terminate the agreement if either of us determines (i) that there has been a material breach thereof by the other party, (ii) that the clinical trial may adversely affect patient safety or (iii) to withdraw the development of its compound for medical, scientific or legal reasons. In addition, either we or MSD may terminate the agreement if any regulatory authority takes any action or raises any objection that prevents the terminating party from supplying its compound.

In January 2022, we received regulatory clearance from the Australia Therapeutic Goods Administration, or the TGA, to initiate a Phase 2b clinical trial of our lead product candidate EVX-01 in combination with KEYTRUDA® for the treatment of melanoma. We expect to initiate our Phase 2b clinical trial in the first half of 2022.

Our second lead product candidate developed using our PIONEER platform, EVX-02, is a novel, DNA-based cancer immunotherapy designed to induce a therapeutic immune response in the adjuvant setting in patients with resected melanoma, administered in combination with PD-1 CPI.

In July 2021, we announced preliminary data readout from our Phase 1/2a adjuvant clinical trial of EVX-02 in resectable melanoma demonstrating activation of neoepitope-specific T cells with tumor killing potential. In addition, EVX-02 appeared to be well-tolerated. As of December 31, 2021, 16 patients were recruited to the trial. In March 2022, we reported completion of recruitment of Part 1 of the EVX-02 Phase 1/2a clinical trial.

We believe that the preliminary clinical immune and safety data from the Phase 1/2a clinical trial together with pre-clinical data from both our DNA-based patient-specific cancer immunotherapies, EVX-02 and EVX-03, support moving this candidate into a combined EVX-02/EVX-03 Phase 2b clinical trial. We intend to submit a regulatory filing in the first half of 2022.

Our third lead product candidate developed using our PIONEER platform, EVX-03, is a novel, DNA-based cancer immunotherapy with an antigen presenting cell, or APC, targeting, proprietary unit intended for the treatment of multiple cancers. EVX-03 is in late pre-clinical development. Data from ongoing pre-clinical studies has shown high levels of neoepitope-reactive T cells. We intend to submit a regulatory filing for initiation of a combined Phase 2b clinical trial of our DNA-based cancer immunotherapies, EVX-02 and EVX-03, in the first half of 2022.

For each cancer immunotherapy derived from our PIONEER platform, we have selected the optimal delivery modality to maximize its potential antitumor effect. We are screening and testing a variety of modalities including but not limited to peptides, DNA and mRNA for their ability to elicit an active antitumor effect and T-cell response. Data readouts from our standardized pre-clinical models allow us to select those modalities which we believe will exert the most active antitumor effect in patients. In addition, we also screen and ultimately select different modalities for their speed and cost of manufacturing ensuring they allow for rapid development and large-scale production of our cancer immunotherapies. We believe utilizing this strategy, will provide an advantage as our success with patient-specific cancer immunotherapies does not depend on one single modality.

Additionally, using our EDEN platform, we are developing EVX-B1, a prophylactic multi-component subunit vaccine initially in development for the prevention of S. aureus induced SSTI in patients undergoing elective abdominal hernia surgery. EVX-B1 includes two proprietary and highly protective antigens identified by EDEN in combination with our proprietary chimeric toxin, formulated with a potent adjuvant system. We believe that the predictive power of EDEN and our unique approach to vaccine design may lead to a more effective and highly protective vaccine. EVX-B1 is in late pre-clinical development and we intend to submit a regulatory filing for initiation of our clinical trial in the second half of 2022. We also plan to select our second bacterial product candidate in the first half of 2022.

​

Our Management Team

We believe that our fully AI-driven approach and our portfolio of AI platforms places us at the forefront of effectively translating the immune system into novel drug candidates that trigger the immune system to treat a variety of diseases. To deliver on our objectives, we have built an experienced and broadly skilled management team. Our Chief Executive Officer, Lars Staal Wegner, M.D., joined us in August 2017. He served as part of the Senior Management team, leading all commercial and medical affairs efforts at Bavarian Nordic A/S, a NASDAQ Copenhagen listed biotech company, for 10 years prior to joining our company. Prior to that, Dr. Wegner worked in oncology at Pfizer Inc. and served as a clinician at public institutions. On October 15, 2021, our then Chief Financial Officer, Glenn S. Vraniak, informed us that he would be leaving to pursue opportunities outside the biopharmaceutical industry effective on November 1, 2021. Prior to joining us, Mr. Vraniak had served as Chief Financial Officer of electroCore, Inc., a US publicly traded company, from August 2016 until April 2019. As of November 1, 2021, our Co-Founder and Chief Business Officer, Niels Iversen Møller, M.D., replaced Mr. Vraniak, and since that time has acted as our Interim Chief Financial Officer. Prior to founding our company, from our inception in 2008 until August 2017, Dr. Møller was our Chief Executive Officer. Dr. Møller received his M.D. from the University of Copenhagen and his BA in Economics from Copenhagen Business School. Dr. Møller has also held positions as Medical Director at Medical Prognosis, a bioinformatic company, and as Medical Advisor on new oncology product development at AstraZeneca PLC. Erik Deichmann Heegaard, Ph.D., DMSc, joined us in April 2021 as our Chief Medical Officer. Dr. Heegaard has more than 25 years of experience within oncology and infectious diseases. Prior to joining us, Dr. Heegaard served as Head of Medical at Novartis Oncology, Nordics, and as Chief Medical Officer of the oral GLP-1 project at Novo Nordisk where he successfully completed Phase 1 and 2 clinical trials for the project and served as chief architect of the global Phase 3 clinical development program for the project. Prior to that, Dr. Heegaard held numerous research and clinical positions in companies such as Sandia National Laboratories, Bavarian Nordic and Statens Serum Institut. Our other Co-Founder and Chief Innovation Officer, Andreas Holm Mattsson, is a pioneer within in silico development, having already initiated the framework of our proprietary AI platforms while enrolled in academic studies, and eventually inventing the EDEN platform. Our Chief Scientific Officer, Birgitte Rønø, Ph.D., joined us in September 2017. Dr Rønø has more than 15 years’ experience in biopharmaceutical drug discovery from academia and industry. Prior to joining Evaxion, Dr. Rønø served as a specialist, team leader and project manager at Novo Nordisk, from 2013-2017, where she was leading early drug discovery projects, evaluating in-licensing opportunities, and supporting drug development projects with pre-clinical and biomarker expertise.

Jesper Nyegaard Nissen, MSc joined us in March 2022 as our Chief Operating Officer pursuant to the terms of his Service Agreement entered into on January 16, 2022. Mr. Nissen has more than 25 years of experience in the pharmaceutical industry across finance, investments, research and development. Mr. Nissen began his career in Novo Nordisk Corporate Finance being responsible for development of controlling and performance management processes followed by the role as finance responsible for different corporate business areas. In 2020, Mr. Nissen moved into senior leadership roles as Vice President / and later as Corporate Vice President within for Global Research Operations with the focus on research and development and strategic and operational development, which included the responsibilities for clinical sourcing, development IT strategies, establishment of development shared service center in India, application of real world evidence, orRWE and health economics related to clinical trials, development of research strategies, research portfolio governance, operation of global research sites, design and operation of external research engagement models among others. Since January 2021 until joining us, Mr. Nissen has worked for Fujifilm Diosynth Biotechnologies in the program management team for large scale capital projects driving Fujifilm Diosynth Biotechnologies mission to become a global leader within contract development and manufacturing orgsanizations, or CDMOs. Mr. Nissen received his MSc Business Economics (Cand. Oecon.) from the University of Aarhus, Denmark.

On March 14, 2022, we announced that Bo Karmark would join us as our Chief Financial Officer. Mr. Karmark is an experienced financial executive with a career spanning more than 25 years working for several multinational listed companies, primarily in the biotech, pharma, and bioscience industries. Before joining us, he served as the Chief Financial Officer for Aquaporin A/S, a water technology company, for the past seven years. Aquaporin is listed on the Nasdaq Copenhagen stock exchange. Before that, Mr. Karmark held numerous financial management positions at various companies including Chr Hansen Holding A/S, H. Lundbeck A/S, and NsGene A/S. Mr. Karmark received his M.Sc. in Business Administration and Auditing form the Copenhagen Business School, Denmark.

Background on Cancer Immunotherapy and the Role of Neoepitopes

The immune system is our body’s natural defense system that protects us against infection and diseases. It keeps track of all of the substances normally found in the body and raises an alarm if an unfamiliar substance is found, launching an attack against it. However, cancer cells can present a more challenging target for the immune system. Cancer cells are altered normal cells and therefore the immune system doesn’t always recognize them as foreign. In fact, cancer cells possess several mechanisms through which they escape immune surveillance as they:

To overcome this, immunotherapies use different ways to seek the power of the patient’s own immune system to fight cancerous cells. The regulatory approval of immune CPIs has been a major breakthrough in treatment of patients suffering from advanced solid tumor cancers by demonstrating beneficial clinical responses, durable disease control and improved survival in subsets of patients. Detailed mapping of the underlying mechanisms has revealed that the CPI-induced antitumor effect is associated with the patient’s ability to mount a tumor-specific T-cell response. To further improve clinical efficacy, different co-targeting strategies are currently being explored, including the combination of CPI and T-cell immunotherapies capable of directing and improving the patients’ immune response specifically towards essential functions in the cancer cells.

The Role of T Cells in Cancer Immunotherapy

T cells are a type of white blood cell that play a central role in the immune system. T cells are involved in both detecting and killing infected or abnormal cells, such as cancer cells, as well as coordinating immune responses. T cells can be classified into two major subsets, CD4+ T cells and CD8+ T cells, each possessing different functionalities. CD8+ T cells are considered the main effectors in T-cell mediated tumor killing, however, several reports have highlighted the importance of inducing both CD4+ and CD8+ T cells as T helper 1, or Th1, CD4+ T cells support CD8+ T cells priming as well as promote the desired effects via secretion of effector cytokines.

T cells recognize cancer cells using T-cell receptors, or TCRs, that interact with specific immune targets, or epitopes, presented by a molecular structure on the surface of cells known as the major histocompatibility complex, or MHC. The MHC molecules bind to peptides from protein degradation inside the cell before being transported to the cell surface to present the peptide to TCRs. If a peptide bound to the MHC molecule is recognized by T cells, it is called an epitope. There are two classes of MHC molecules, class I and class II, that activate CD8+ and CD4+ T cells, respectively. In humans, MHC is encoded by the genes of the HLA locus. HLA genes show high allelic variation, resulting in MHC molecules that have different peptide binding preferences. Each person expresses a unique combination of molecularly distinct class I and class II MHC molecules that bind a specific set of peptides and epitopes.

Mutated genes in cancer cells lead to expression of altered proteins which are, like all proteins, processed by the cellular machinery into protein fragments known as peptides. When these mutated peptides are presented on MHC molecules, by either tumor cells or antigen presenting cells, and recognized by T cells, they are known as neoepitopes.

The immune system refrains from targeting the body’s own healthy cells principally through processes known as central and peripheral tolerance, by which T cells are educated not to respond to MHCs displaying peptides from normal proteins and therefore avoid targeting normal cells for destruction. The TCR-peptide-MHC interaction is a vital immune mechanism that allows the body both to respond against threats, including cancer, as well as to avoid targeting the body’s own healthy cells. Understanding the interactions between TCRs, peptides and specific MHC alleles is critical to directing and activating an immune response to cancer.

Neoepitope-Based Cancer Immunotherapies

The common feature of cancer is accumulation of mutations in the genes, which manifests as tumors with uncontrolled growth. Cancer is a complex, extremely heterogeneous condition. Despite this complexity and variability, patients with the same type and stage of cancer have historically been administered the same treatment. This approach has been altered in recent years with the introduction of precision medicine cancer immunotherapies, a tailored approach for selecting therapy at the individual patient level based on the genetic makeup of a patient’s cancer. Discovery of molecular cancer biomarkers (i.e. cancer oncogenes) has paved the way for the first generation of personalized therapies. Genomic screening approaches have been commonly employed to identify tumor-specific, overexpressed proteins or genetic mutations that may confer targets for an effective cancer immunotherapy.

We believe a truly personalized, or patient-specific approach, incorporating the entirety of the tumor ecosystem, while taking a more unbiased approach to drug design, is required to advert the inherent complexities of the tumor microenvironment and heterogeneous cellular landscape, and to improve the clinical outcome of cancer immunotherapies. We believe such approach can be achieved by directing immunotherapies towards cancer-exclusive peptide sequences, so called neoepitopes, displayed on the surface of tumor cell originating from patient-specific mutations. Neoepitope-targeting immunotherapies have shown great promise in pre-clinical animal models as well as in early clinical trials.

Neoepitopes provide an avenue for tumor-specific immune cell recognition, a prerequisite for a beneficial clinical response of a neoepitope-based immunotherapy. Antigen presenting cells, or APCs, educate the immune system by presenting neoepitopes to T cells. Tumor cells can also present neoepitopes on their cell surface, providing accessible targets for T cells. T cells recognize and kill neoepitope-presenting cancer cells and effect a positive feedback loop to heighten and broaden the cancer specific immune response as more epitopes will be available for APC uptake upon T-cell mediated tumor cell lysis.

Once patient-specific neoepitopes are administered to the patient, APCs will process the neoepitopes by the MHC epitope presentation machinery, migrate to the lymph node and present neoepitopes to T cells. TCRs on circulating CD4+ and CD8+ T cells bind to the presented neoepitopes triggering initial T-cell activation. Once activated, the T cells will enter the circulation to reach distant organs, including the tumor. In the tumor, reactive T cells will encounter tumor cell surface displayed neoepitopes, resulting in T cell mediated tumor cell killing.

Cancer patients normally do not have a meaningful numbers of T cells that recognize their tumor. We believe a neoepitope-targeting approach will generate a strong, de novo tumor-specific T-cell response which will lead to killing of tumor cells and thereby an improved clinical response. Further, we believe such approach has great therapeutic potential because neoepitopes represent foreign elements to the immune system and are unique to each person’s tumor cells which means neither self-tolerance nor adverse side effects are likely to limit the clinical application of a neoepitope-based immunotherapy.

The goal of the cancer immunotherapy is to promote T-cell priming and expansion of effector T cells for direct and specific tumor killing. It is well-established that DNA vaccination harbors self-adjuvating effects via the innate DNA sensing machinery in mammalian cells. This directs the immune response towards Th1-like immunity which is generally considered to be preferable in cancer therapies. Further, the DNA plasmid allows for a large number of neoepitopes to be delivered simultaneously in one single drug molecule thus making it possible to include all top ranked PIONEER predicted neoepitopes in the therapy. When administered to the patient, we expect that EVX-02 DNA plasmid will be taken up by APCs and neoepitopes will be expressed, processed into smaller components and loaded onto the MHC molecules on the cell surface eliciting a neoepitope-specific immune response.

Addressable Market for EVX-02

Despite the recent significant advances with the use of CPIs for melanoma, there continues to be a significant unmet medical need for patients with Stage IIIB/IIIC/IIID and Stage IV melanoma that are completely surgically excised. With current standard of care, approximately 30.0% of patients relapse within one year and more than 40.0% within three years and eventually succumb to their disease. Thus, we believe well-tolerated and effective treatments are still needed in the adjuvant setting of melanomas to improve clinical outcomes.

Our EVX-02 Pre-Clinical Data

The pharmacological effect of EVX-02 mouse specific compounds was addressed in the well-established CT26 syngeneic tumor mouse model. As the EVX-02 immunotherapy is truly patient-specific and the plasmid design is based on each patient’s individual tumor mutational profile, pre-clinical efficacy testing of patient-specific EVX-02 molecules is not feasible. Instead, mouse surrogate compounds were designed by PIONEER directed identification of CT26 tumor-specific neoepitopes.

In several in vivo pharmacology studies, treatment with a mouse specific EVX-02 immunotherapy, or mEVX-02, induced robust, dose-dependent antitumor immunity in the CT26 tumor model (see Figure 28A and Figure 29 below). Moreover, we have demonstrated enhanced antitumor effects by including both MHC class I and II epitopes in the mEVX-02 neoepitope-targeting immunotherapy (Figure 30) and by combining mEVX-02 immunizations with anti-mouse PD1 treatment (Figure 31). Further, detailed complementary ex vivo analyses, unravelling the mEVX-02 induced T-cell response, demonstrated neoepitope-recognizing circulating CD8+ T cells (see Figure 28B below) and neoepitope-reactive T cells in the spleens of EVX-02 treated mice as evidenced by cytokine positive CD4+ and CD8+ T cells (Figure 28C-D).

The market for combatting drug-resistant bacteria is projected to increase significantly. According to The World Bank, drug-resistant infections could by 2050 cause global economic damage on par with the 2008 financial crisis. The Global Bacterial Vaccines Market was valued at $16.27 billion in 2018 and is projected to reach $29.85 billion by 2026, growing at a CAGR of 7.9% from 2019 to 2026.

Bacterial Vaccinology

Vaccines work by training the immune system to recognize and combat pathogens, either bacteria or viruses. To do this, certain molecules, called antigens, from the pathogen must be introduced into the body to trigger a protective immune response. By injecting vaccines containing antigens, the immune system will safely recognize them and trigger an immune response that leads to protective immunity. If the antigen-harboring bacteria or virus appears in the body during an early infection, the immune system will recognize the antigens displayed and immediately attack the pathogen before it can invade and establish a persistent infection and cause disease. The antigens can be secreted toxins or specific virulence factors and by targeting them, the pathogen can more easily be neutralized.

The adaptive immune response following vaccination protects the body from infections by mounting a specific antibody-mediated immune response (B-cell response) and/or a T-cell response. Antibodies can have different functions, but in general they either lead to neutralization of the pathogen (blocking function of important surface molecules or toxins), opsonization (antibodies bind to pathogen surface and flag them for phagocytosis and killing by immune cells), or complement activation (bound antibodies trigger a cascade of proteins that bind to the pathogen and form a pore that eventually lyses the bacteria or enhances opsonization further). On the other hand, the cellular immune response involves cell-mediated cytotoxicity (killing of infected cells), release of cytokines and chemokines as well as phagocytosis (pathogens are taken up and neutralized by macrophages).

In order to provoke the correct type of immunity as well as receive long-lasting and high protection, many vaccines include adjuvants as part of the formulation. Different adjuvants systems trigger different parts of the immune system. Even though adjuvants are critical components of the vaccines, they typically do not have protective properties by themselves in the absence of the specific antigens. The use of correct adjuvants in combination with the selected vaccine antigen(s) is important for the vaccine design.

A typical bacterial pathogen consists of thousands of unique proteins. Only few of them elicit a protective immune response in a vaccine setting. Modern sequencing technology has enabled detailed insight into the entire genome of several clinical isolates of the same pathogen. This in turn has paved the way for computational antigen selection tools that can select a limited number of vaccine antigen candidates from whole bacterial genomes as a starting point for vaccine development. A challenge in computational, or bioinformatic, predictions, however, is to correctly identify posttranslational modifications and other molecular mechanisms that can change the structure and potential antigenic properties of bacterial antigens and optimize antigens in terms of stability, epitope presentation, ease of production and safety.

EDEN – Our AI Platform for the Discovery and Design of Novel Prophylactic Vaccines for Bacterial Diseases

Overview

EDEN is our second AI-driven platform that rapidly identifies novel, highly protective antigens for the use in pathogen-specific prophylactic vaccines against drug-resistant bacteria. Within EDEN, our proprietary algorithms allow us to predict and identify those antigens that we believe will trigger a robust, protective immune response against almost any bacterial infectious disease. EDEN has also been constructed to redesign vaccine antigens, i.e. engineer such antigens into soluble vaccine constructs for large scale production which potentially allow us to move antigen candidates into the clinic far faster than traditional vaccine discovery and development approaches.

Key Advantages of our EDEN Platform

We believe that our AI-based vaccine discovery and design approach has several advantages over more traditional approaches, including:

The EDEN platform is continuously improved to ensure it remains state-of-the-art and incorporates multiple aspects of vaccine development from discovery to clinical testing. We explore among other improvements, incorporation of new translational features and data into EDEN, novel machine learning architectures such as deep learning and probabilistic programming to enhance protein structure and function prediction, generation of novel high-throughput data to be incorporated into our AI technology for assessment of solubility and CMC-readiness and methods for determining broadness of protection across strains. By continuous improvement in all aspects of vaccine development, we believe the EDEN platform will continue to produce potent vaccine product candidates with minimal testing before entering clinical development.

The data demonstrate that our EDEN platform is capable of identifying highly protective antigens based on the bacterium proteome. A finding that holds true for multiple bacteria with diverse pathogenicity, emphasizing the broad usability of the platform.

Our EVX-B1 Product Candidate

Overview

Our EVX-B1 product candidate is a multi-component subunit prophylactic vaccine, initially being developed for the prevention of SSTI in patients undergoing elective hernia surgery. EVX-B1 includes two proprietary and highly protective antigens identified by EDEN in combination with two known toxins that play a key role in S. aureus pathogenesis formulated together with a potent adjuvant, CAF01. EVX-B1 is intended to be administered prior to surgery. Upon administration to the patient, we believe that EVX-B1 will significantly reduce S. aureus related SSTI.

EVX-B1 is currently in pre-clinical development. We intend to assess the final formulation of EVX-B1 for safety in a repeat dose toxicity trial for a regulatory filing in the second half of 2022.

Previous attempts to design vaccines to combat S. aureus have not been successful. We believe EVX-B1 is a highly competitive vaccine capable of out-performing other programs in clinical development as it has been designed to:

Addressable Market for EVX-B1

S. aureus is responsible for significant morbidity and mortality worldwide and antibiotic-resistant S. aureus, and in particular MRSA infections, are, according to the CDC, of critical concern and remain a prevention priority. In the United States, S. aureus is estimated to cause 20,000 deaths and amount to a total bill of $15 billion on the health service annually. The global MRSA drugs market is expected to reach over US$ 3.9 billion by 2025.

We are initially developing EVX-B1 for the prevention of S. aureus induced SSTI in patients undergoing hernia surgery. To date, no prophylactic vaccine for the prevention of S. aureus infections has received marketing authorization. With the development of EVX-B1, we are addressing this unmet medical need and believe our candidate has the potential to be the first vaccine to receive approval for the prevention of S. aureus infections.

Upon successful completion of a Phase 2b clinical trial, we intend to expand development of EVX-B1 for the prevention of S. aureus in surgical infections beyond abdominal hernia surgery, such as orthopedic surgical infections, and may explore other indications such as recurrent skin infection indications including, acne, diabetic foot ulcers and impetigo.

Evaluation and Selection of Vaccine Antigens

We applied EDEN to the proteome of S. aureus to predict the antigens most likely to induce protective immunity. Forty-four (44) novel vaccine antigens were identified, expressed as recombinant proteins and assessed for protection in a S. aureus mouse sepsis model. Of these, 13 antigens demonstrated consistent high and significant protection in this model. The protection data is summarized in the table below.

​

​

The 13 antigens were further subject to extensive bioinformatic analyses to determine their function. Also, early production and formulation characteristics were addressed. Two antigens were selected based on the following parameters:

The two lead antigens were designed and expressed as one fusion protein, EDEN-Fusion-1.

Evaluation and Selection of Toxins

We have evaluated multiple S. aureus toxins and selected the two most promising candidates for our proprietary toxoid fusion protein, which has demonstrated protection in sepsis models and skin abscess models of infection using two different challenge strains. Our toxoid fusion protein, Hla-LukE, includes inactivated forms of α-hemolysin (Hla) and Leukotoxin E (LukE), two toxoids having demonstrated high levels of protection when assessed in animal models amongst publicly described S. aureus toxins.

​

Evaluation and Selection of Adjuvant

The vaccine antigens and toxin constructs will be formulated with the potent adjuvant CAF01. CAF01 is a cationic liposomal formulation. The hallmark for CAF01 is its ability to induce CD4+ T-cell responses, especially Th1 cells and Th17 cells after parenteral vaccination with strong antibody response. CAF01 has been used in other vaccine programs undergoing clinical testing (in tuberculosis and chlamydia) and has an attractive safety and immunogenicity profile.

​