enGene (ENGN) 424B3Prospectus supplement

Filed Pursuant to Rule 424(b)(3)
Registration No. 333-275700

ENGENE HOLDINGS INC.

Up to 47,144,548 Common Shares and 6,386,589 Warrants to be Offered and Sold by Selling Holders

Up to 9,794,498 Common Shares Issuable Upon Exercise of Warrants

This prospectus relates to the offer and sale from time to time by the selling securityholders named in this prospectus (the “Selling Holders”) of up to: (i) 6,462,016 of our common shares, without par value (“Common Shares” or “enGene Common Shares”) and 2,783,949 warrants to purchase Common Shares (the “Warrants” or “enGene Warrants”) issued for the consideration described in the succeeding paragraph below in connection with the 2023 PIPE Financing (as defined below) and a Non-Redemption Agreement (as defined below) to certain investors (the “PIPE/NRA Investors”) including FEAC Sponsor (as defined herein) or an affiliate thereof; (ii) 14,295,943 Common Shares and 3,602,640 Warrants held by certain Selling Holders party to the Registration Rights Agreement (as defined herein), including FEAC Sponsor or an affiliate thereof, (iii) 6,386,589 Common Shares that may be obtained by the Selling Holders upon the exercise of the Warrants at an exercise price of $11.50 described in (i) and (ii) above, and (iv) 20,000,000 of our Common Shares issued for the consideration described below in connection with the 2024 PIPE Financing (as defined below). See “Selling Holders” for more information about the Selling Holders, including with respect to their acquisition of the securities offered hereby.

Investors in the 2023 PIPE Financing purchased a total of 6,435,441 Common Shares and 2,702,791 Warrants for an aggregate consideration of $56,891,682. As a result, each investor in the 2023 PIPE Financing received approximately 1.1595 Common Shares and approximately 0.4870 Warrants for each $10.25 of subscription price. The party to the Non-Redemption Agreement received 26,575 Common Shares and 81,158 Warrants in consideration of such investor’s commitment to not redeem 166,665 shares of FEAC Class A Shares (as defined herein) in connection with the consummation of our business combination with Forbion European Acquisition Corp. (“FEAC”) and enGene Inc. (the “Business Combination”). The Common Shares and Warrants issued to the Selling Holder party to the Non-Redemption Agreement were determined so as to put such Selling Holder in the same position had such Selling Holder invested in the 2023 PIPE Financing an amount equal to the foregone redemption proceeds.

Selling Holders party to the Registration Rights Agreement hold securities registered for resale hereunder as follows: (i) 5,248,647 Common Shares and 2,204,355 Warrants obtained in the Business Combination in respect of the Convertible Bridge Financing (as defined herein) of enGene Inc. for the same price per Common Share and Warrant as applicable to investors in the 2023 PIPE Financing described above, (ii) 1,373,496 Common Shares (the “FEAC Sponsor Shares”) corresponding to a like number of shares of FEAC Class B Shares (as defined herein) purchased by FEAC Sponsor for a nominal amount prior to FEAC’ s initial public offering (the “FEAC IPO”), (iii) 731,619 Warrants (the “Private Warrants”) purchased by FEAC Sponsor at a price of $1.50 per Warrant, (iv) 2,000,000 Common Shares and 666,666 Warrants held by an affiliate of FEAC Sponsor and corresponding to a like number of securities purchased in FEAC’s IPO for a price of $10.00 for a unit consisting of one share and one-third of a Warrant, and (v) 5,673,800 Common Shares obtained in the Business Combination by certain former holders of the equity of enGene Inc. (the “Legacy enGene Investors”), based on the enGene Exchange Ratio negotiated in connection with the Business Combination. As set out in more detail herein the enGene Exchange Ratio was based on a reference equity value of enGene Inc. of $90.0 million and a reference price per Common Share of $10.25. See “Information Related to Offered Securities”.

Investors in the 2024 PIPE Financing purchased a total of 20,000,000 Common Shares for an aggregate consideration of $200,000,000, less offering expenses. As a result, each investor in the 2024 PIPE Financing received 1 (one) Common Share for each $10.00 of subscription price, as further described in “Summary of the Prospectus — Recent Developments — 2024 PIPE Financing”.

This prospectus also relates to the issuance by us of up to an aggregate of 9,794,498 Common Shares upon the exercise of a like number of Warrants consisting of (i) the 6,386,589 Warrants described above following their public resale by the Selling Holders and (ii) 3,407,909 additional outstanding Warrants. The Warrants have an exercise price of $11.50 per share.

We will not receive any of the proceeds from the sale of the securities by the Selling Holders. The aggregate proceeds to the Selling Holders will be the sale price of the securities less any discounts and commissions borne by the Selling Holders.

We will receive proceeds from Warrants exercised in the event that such Warrants are exercised for cash, which amount of aggregate proceeds could be up to approximately $112.6 million, assuming the exercise in full of all of the Warrants for cash. There is no assurance that Warrants will be and/or remain in the money prior to their expiration or that the holders of Warrants will elect to exercise any or all of their Warrants for cash. We believe the likelihood that these holders will exercise their Warrants, and therefore any cash proceeds that we may receive in relation to the exercise thereof, will depend on the trading price of our Common Shares. If the market price for our Common Shares is less than the exercise price of Warrants, we believe the holders of Warrants will be unlikely to exercise them. See “Risk Factors — There is no assurance that Warrants will be and/or remain in the money prior to their expiration or that the holders of Warrants will elect to exercise any or all of their Warrants for cash; the Warrants may expire worthless.” and “Use of Proceeds.”

Our Common Shares and Warrants are listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market (“Nasdaq”) under the symbols “ENGN” and “ENGNW,” respectively. On February 23, 2024, the closing price of our Common Shares was $15.05 and the closing price for our Warrants was $3.80.

Prior to the extraordinary general meeting of FEAC in connection with the Business Combination held on October 24, 2023, holders of 10,379,144 FEAC Class A Shares exercised their right to redeem those shares for cash at a price of approximately $11.01 per share for an aggregate redemption amount of approximately $114.3 million. The Common Shares and Warrants being offered for resale in this prospectus represent approximately 94.0% of our total outstanding Common Shares and approximately 65.2% of our outstanding Warrants, respectively, as of the date of this prospectus. The sale of all the securities being offered in this prospectus, following any applicable lock-up periods, could result in a significant decline in the public trading price of our Common Shares and Warrants. Despite such a decline in the public trading prices, the Selling Holders may still experience a positive rate of return on the securities they purchased due to the differences in the trading price and the purchase prices at which they purchased the securities as described above. See “Risk Factors — Selling Holders acquired their securities in enGene offered hereby at prices below the current trading price of such securities, and would experience a positive rate of return based on the current trading price. Future investors in our Company may not experience a similar rate of return.” and “Risk Factors — Sales of Common Shares, or the perception of such sales, by us or the Selling Holders pursuant to this prospectus in the public market or otherwise could cause the market price for our Common Shares to decline and certain Selling Holders still may receive a significant rate of return.”

Our registration of the securities covered by this prospectus does not mean that either we or the Selling Holders will issue, offer or sell, as applicable, any of the securities. The Selling Holders may offer and sell the securities covered by this prospectus in a number of different ways and at varying prices. We provide more information in the section entitled “Plan of Distribution.”

Certain Selling Holders acquired their securities through more than one of the above. See “Selling Holders.” This prospectus provides you with a general description of such securities and the general manner in which the Selling Holders may offer or sell the securities. More specific terms of any securities that the Selling Holders may offer or sell may be provided in a prospectus supplement that describes, among other things, the specific amounts and prices of the securities being offered and the terms of the offering. The prospectus supplement may also add, update or change information contained in this prospectus.

You should read this prospectus and any prospectus supplement or amendment carefully before you invest in our securities.

Investing in our securities involves a high degree of risk. See “Risk Factors” beginning on page 19 of this prospectus and in the other documents that are incorporated by reference in this prospectus.

Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any state securities commission has approved or disapproved of these securities or determined if this prospectus is truthful or complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.

The date of this prospectus is March 5, 2024.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

You should rely only on the information contained in this prospectus. No one has been authorized to provide you with information that is different from that contained in this prospectus. This prospectus is dated as of the date set forth on the cover hereof. You should not assume that the information contained in this prospectus is accurate as of any date other than that date.

For investors outside the United States: We have not done anything that would permit this offering or possession or distribution of this prospectus in any jurisdiction where action for that purpose is required, other than in the United States. You are required to inform yourselves about and to observe any restrictions relating to this offering and the distribution of this prospectus.

i

ABOUT THIS PROSPECTUS

This prospectus is part of a registration statement on Form S-1 that we filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) using a “shelf” registration process. Under this shelf registration process, we and the Selling Holders may, from time to time, issue, offer and sell, as applicable, any combination of the securities described in this prospectus in one or more offerings. We may use the shelf registration statement to issue up to an aggregate of 9,794,498 Common Shares upon exercise of the Warrants. The Selling Holders may use the shelf registration statement to sell up to an aggregate of 47,144,548 Common Shares and up to 6,386,589 Warrants from time to time through any means described in the section entitled “Plan of Distribution.” More specific terms of any securities that the Selling Holders offer and sell may be provided in a prospectus supplement that describes, among other things, the specific amounts and prices of the Common Shares and/or Warrants being offered and the terms of the offering.

A prospectus supplement may also add, update or change information included in this prospectus. Any statement contained in this prospectus will be deemed to be modified or superseded for purposes of this prospectus to the extent that a statement contained in such prospectus supplement modifies or supersedes such statement. Any statement so modified will be deemed to constitute a part of this prospectus only as so modified, and any statement so superseded will be deemed not to constitute a part of this prospectus. You should rely only on the information contained in this prospectus, any applicable prospectus supplement or any related free writing prospectus. See “Where You Can Find More Information.”

Neither we nor the Selling Holders have authorized anyone to provide any information or to make any representations other than those contained in this prospectus, any accompanying prospectus supplement or any free writing prospectus we have prepared. We and the Selling Holders take no responsibility for, and can provide no assurance as to the reliability of, any other information that others may give you. This prospectus is an offer to sell only the securities offered hereby and only under circumstances and in jurisdictions where it is lawful to do so. No dealer, salesperson or other person is authorized to give any information or to represent anything not contained in this prospectus, any applicable prospectus supplement or any related free writing prospectus. This prospectus is not an offer to sell securities, and it is not soliciting an offer to buy securities, in any jurisdiction where the offer or sale is not permitted. You should assume that the information appearing in this prospectus or any prospectus supplement is accurate only as of the date on the front of those documents only, regardless of the time of delivery of this prospectus or any applicable prospectus supplement, or any sale of a security. Our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may have changed since those dates.

This prospectus contains summaries of certain provisions contained in some of the documents described herein, but reference is made to the actual documents for complete information. All of the summaries are qualified in their entirety by the actual documents. Copies of some of the documents referred to herein have been filed, will be filed or will be incorporated by reference as exhibits to the registration statement of which this prospectus is a part, and you may obtain copies of those documents as described below under “Where You Can Find More Information.”

On October 31, 2023 (the “Closing Date”), enGene Holdings Inc. (“enGene” or the “Company”) consummated the previously announced business combination (the “Business Combination”) with Forbion European Acquisition Corp., a Cayman Islands exempted company and a special purpose acquisition corporation (“FEAC”), and enGene Inc., a corporation incorporated under the laws of Canada (“enGene Inc.”), pursuant to the Business Combination Agreement, dated as of May 16, 2023 (as amended, the “Business Combination Agreement”). As a result of the Business Combination, the Company became a publicly traded company, with enGene Inc. as its subsidiary continuing the existing business operations. The Common Shares and Warrants of the Company commenced trading on the Nasdaq Capital Market under the symbols “ENGN” and “ENGNW,” respectively, on November 1, 2023.

The Business Combination was completed pursuant to the Business Combination Agreement, as described below under “Summary of the Prospectus — Background and Business Combination.”

1

CERTAIN DEFINED TERMS

Unless the context indicates otherwise, references to the terms “enGene,” “New enGene,” the “Company,” the “Registrant,” “Newco,” “we,” “us” and “our” refer to enGene Holdings Inc. and its subsidiaries at and after the Closing Date and giving effect to the consummation of the transactions contemplated by the Business Combination. “enGene Inc.” or “Old enGene” refers to enGene Inc. and its subsidiary prior to the Business Combination.

In addition, for convenience the following terms are used throughout this prospectus with the meanings set out below:

2

3

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Certain statements in this prospectus may constitute “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of U.S. securities laws and “forward-looking information” within the meaning of Canadian securities laws (collectively, “forward-looking statements”). enGene’s forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements regarding enGene’s management teams’ expectations, hopes, beliefs, intentions, goals or strategies regarding the future. In addition, any statements that refer to projections, forecasts or other characterizations of future events or circumstances, including any underlying assumptions, are forward-looking statements. The words “anticipate,” “appear,” “approximate,” “believe,” “continue,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “foresee,” “intends,” “may,” “might,” “plan,” “possible,” “potential,” “predict,” “project,” “seek,” “should,” “would” and similar expressions (or the negative version of such words or expressions) may identify forward-looking statements, but the absence of these words does not mean that a statement is not forward-looking. Forward-looking statements in this prospectus may include, for example, statements about:

4

All forward looking-statements, including, without limitation, our examination of historical operating trends, are based upon our current expectations and various assumptions. Certain assumptions made in preparing the forward-looking statements include:

You should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements which speak only as of the date hereof. The forward-looking statements contained in this prospectus are based primarily on current expectations and projections about future events and trends that may affect our business, financial condition and operating results. The following uncertainties and factors, among other things (including those described in “Risk Factors”), could affect future performance and actual results to differ materially and adversely from those expressed in, anticipated or implied by forward-looking statements:

In addition, statements that “we believe” and similar statements reflect beliefs and opinions on the relevant subject. These statements are based on information available to us as of the date of this prospectus. While we believe that information provides a reasonable basis for these statements, that information may be limited or incomplete. Our statements should not be read to indicate that we have conducted an exhaustive inquiry into, or

5

review of, all relevant information. These statements are inherently uncertain, and investors are cautioned not to unduly rely on these statements.

The forward-looking statements made in this prospectus relate only to events as of the date on which the statements are made. We undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statements made in this prospectus to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this prospectus or to reflect new information or the occurrence of unanticipated events, except as required by law. We may not actually achieve the plans, intentions or expectations disclosed in our forward-looking statements, and you should not place undue reliance on our forward-looking statements.

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

RISK FACTORS

Investing in our securities involves risks. Before you make a decision to buy our securities, in addition to the risks and uncertainties discussed above under “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements,” you should carefully consider the specific risks set forth herein. If any of these risks actually occur, it may materially harm our business, financial condition, liquidity and results of operations. As a result, the market price of our securities could decline, and you could lose all or part of your investment. Additionally, the risks and uncertainties described in this prospectus, any prospectus supplement or in any document incorporated by reference herein or therein are not the only risks and uncertainties that we face. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently believe to be immaterial may become material and adversely affect our business.

Risks Related to Our Business

The sizes of the markets and forecasts of market growth for the demand of our novel gene therapy platform, product candidates and other key potential success factors are based on a number of complex assumptions and estimates, and may be inaccurate.

We estimate total addressable markets and forecasts of market growth for our novel gene therapy platform and differentiated product candidates. Our forecasts and key performance indicators are based on a number of complex assumptions, internal and third-party estimates in published literature, and other business data, including assumptions and estimates relating to our ability to manage operating expenses of, invest in, develop and generate revenue from our gene therapy platform, product candidates and related services in the future. While we believe our assumptions and the data underlying our estimates and key performance indicators are reasonable, there are inherent challenges in measuring or forecasting such information. As a result, these assumptions and estimates may not be correct and the conditions supporting our assumptions or estimates may change at any time, thereby reducing the predictive accuracy of these underlying factors and metrics. Consequently, our estimates of the total addressable markets and our forecasts of market growth for our novel gene therapy platform and differentiated product candidates may prove to be incorrect. For example, if the annual total addressable markets or the potential market growth for our gene therapies is smaller than we have estimated or if the key business metrics we utilize to forecast commercial opportunities are inaccurate, it may have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We expect to make significant investments in our continued research and development of EG-70, a novel non-viral gene therapy for the purpose of stimulating the adaptive immune system, EG-i08, a pulmonary program, and other new product candidates and gene therapies and services, which may not be successful, and if they are not successful, we may not be able to achieve or sustain profitability in the future. As an organization, we do not have any experience in any such new lines of business, and failure to identify other product candidates and/or execute on the expansion of our business would adversely affect our business and results of operations.

Biotechnology product development is expensive, takes years to complete, and has uncertain outcomes. Failure can occur at any stage of product development. In addition, if we determine that any of our current or future products or services are unlikely to succeed, we may abandon them without any return on our investment. We expect to incur significant expenses to advance our gene therapy development efforts, which may be unsuccessful. Developing new product candidates is a speculative, risky and highly competitive endeavor. Product candidates that initially show promise may fail to achieve the desired results in development and clinical studies and may ultimately not prove to be safe and effective or meet expectations for clinical utility. We may be unable to establish clinical endpoints that applicable regulatory authorities would consider clinically meaningful, and a clinical trial can fail at any stage of testing. We may need to alter our offerings in development and repeat clinical studies before we develop a potentially successful product. If, after development, a product appears successful, we will still need to obtain U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) and other regulatory

19

approvals before we can market it. The FDA’s approval pathways are likely to involve significant time, as well as additional research, development and clinical study expenditures. The FDA may not clear, authorize or approve any product we develop. Even if we develop a product that receives regulatory clearance, authorization or approval, we would need to commit substantial resources to commercialize, sell and market it before it could be profitable, and the product may never be commercially successful. Additionally, development of any product or service may be disrupted or made less viable by the development of competing products or services. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with developing product candidates, we are unable to predict whether or when our therapeutics business may successfully commercialize a product candidate.

We have incurred net losses in every year since our inception and anticipate that we will continue to incur net losses in the foreseeable future.

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company and have incurred net losses in each reporting period since our inception, have not generated any revenue from product sales to date and have financed our operations principally through third-party investments in our debt and share instruments. Our net losses were $99.9 million and $24.5 million for the fiscal years ended October 31, 2023 and October 31, 2022, respectively. As of October 31, 2023, we had an accumulated deficit of $199.6 million. Our lead product candidate, EG-70, is in clinical trials. Our other programs are in preclinical research and we plan on filing an investigational new drug application (“IND”) with the FDA for a pulmonary program during the first-half of 2025, subject to a multifactor go/no-go assessment involving technical review and assessment of grant support availability. As a result, we expect that it will be several years, if ever, before we have a commercialized product and generate revenue from product sales. Even if we succeed in receiving marketing approval for and commercializing one or more of our product candidates, we expect that we will continue to incur substantial research and development and other expenses in order to discover, develop and market additional potential products.

We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and increasing operating losses for the foreseeable future. The net losses we incur may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter such that a period-to-period comparison of our results of operations may not be a good indication of our future performance. The size of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the pace of our development activities and the rate of future growth of our expenses and our ability to generate revenue. Our prior losses and expected future losses have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our working capital, our ability to fund the development of our product candidates and our ability to achieve and maintain profitability and the performance of our common shares.

Our recurring losses from operations and negative cash flows from operating activities raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.

In our audited consolidated financial statements as of and for the year ended October 31, 2023, we concluded that our net loss, negative cash flows from operating activities, accumulated deficit and need for additional financing in order to fund our future expected negative cash flows raised substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. Similarly, in its report on such annual financial statements, our independent registered public accounting firm included an explanatory paragraph stating that there is substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.

We expect to continue to incur net operating losses for at least the next several years and will need substantial additional funding to support our continuing operations and pursue our growth strategy. If we seek additional financing to fund our business activities in the future and there remains substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern, investors or other financing sources may be unwilling to provide additional funding on commercially reasonable terms or at all. If we cannot continue as a going concern, we may not be able to continue operations, which may result in us winding down, selling or out-licensing our technology or pursuing an alternative strategy. If we fund our operations through debt financings, including senior secured debt, any liquidation of our assets could result in us receiving less than the value at which those assets are carried on our financial statements, and it is likely that our shareholders may lose some or all of their investment in us.

20

We identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting. If we are unable to remedy these material weaknesses, or if we fail to establish and maintain effective internal controls, we may be unable to produce timely and accurate financial statements, and we may determine that our internal control over financial reporting is not effective, which could adversely impact our investors’ confidence and the price of our common shares.

Prior to the consummation of the Business Combination, we had been a private company with limited accounting personnel and other resources with which to address internal control over financial reporting. In connection with the preparation and the audit of the consolidated financial statements as of and for the years ended October 31, 2023 and 2022, we and our independent registered public accounting firm identified material weaknesses, as defined under the Exchange Act and by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), in the internal control over financial reporting, and such material weaknesses remain unremediated. A material weakness is defined as a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. The material weaknesses identified related to: lack of formal policies, procedures and controls related to the design of internal controls over financial reporting including risk assessment process and control activities for certain key financial reporting processes; lack of sufficient accounting and financial reporting personnel to perform appropriate accounting analysis and review procedures; lack of personnel with requisite knowledge and experience in the application of GAAP; general information technology controls that were not designed appropriately (access and system changes); and lack of appropriate segregation of duties in the preparation and review of account reconciliations and journal entries. We have corrected previously presented financial results due to immaterial errors.

We intend to implement in the near term measures designed to improve our internal control over financial reporting to remediate these material weaknesses, including formalizing our processes and internal control documentation and strengthening supervisory reviews by our financial management; hiring additional qualified accounting and finance personnel with requisite knowledge and experience in the application of complex areas of GAAP, managing and collaborating with our financial consultants to enable the implementation of internal control over financial reporting and improve the segregation of duties amongst accounting and finance personnel in the preparation and review of account reconciliations and journal entries. We will also review and improve the design of our general information technology controls including managing user access and privileged access, managing changes in the information system and segregation of duties. The process of designing and implementing effective internal controls is a continuous effort that requires us to anticipate and react to changes in our business and the economic and regulatory environments and to expend significant resources to maintain a system of internal controls that is adequate to satisfy our reporting obligations as a public company. For example, to maintain and improve the effectiveness of our financial reporting, we will need to commit significant resources, implement and strengthen existing reporting processes, train personnel and provide additional management oversight. We will incur additional costs to remediate these weaknesses, primarily personnel costs and external consulting fees. We cannot assure you that any measures we may take in the future will be sufficient to remediate the control deficiencies that led to our material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting or to avoid potential future material weaknesses. In addition, neither our management nor an independent registered public accounting firm has ever performed an evaluation of our internal control over financial reporting in accordance with the provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act because no such evaluation has been required. Had we or our independent registered public accounting firm performed an evaluation of our internal control over financial reporting in accordance with the provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, additional material weaknesses may have been identified. If we are unable to successfully remediate our existing or any future material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting, or if we identify any additional material weaknesses, the accuracy and timing of our financial reporting may be adversely affected, we may be unable to maintain compliance with securities law requirements regarding timely filing of periodic reports in addition to applicable stock exchange listing requirements, investors may lose confidence in our financial reporting, and our share price may decline as a result. We also could become subject to investigations by the applicable stock exchange upon which our securities are traded, the SEC or other regulatory authorities.

21

To date, we have not generated any product revenue, have a history of losses and will need to raise additional capital to fund our operations. If we fail to obtain necessary financing, we will not be able to complete the development and commercialization of our product candidates.

Our operations have consumed substantial amounts of cash since our inception. We expect to continue to spend substantial amounts to conduct further research and development and preclinical or nonclinical testing and studies and clinical trials of our current and future programs, to seek regulatory approvals for our product candidates and to launch and commercialize any products for which we receive regulatory approval. As of October 31, 2023, we had $81.5 million in cash and cash equivalents. On December 22, 2023, the Company entered into an Amended and Restated Loan and Security Agreement (the “Amended Loan Agreement”), with Hercules Capital, Inc., as agent and lender, and the several banks and other financial institutions or entities from time to time parties thereto, and on February 20, 2024, we completed the 2024 PIPE Financing. See “Summary of the Prospectus — Recent Developments — 2024 PIPE Financing” and “Capitalization”. Although we have a detailed current operating plan, our future capital requirements and the period for which our existing resources will support our operations may vary significantly from what we expect. We will in any event require additional capital in order to complete development of any of our current programs. Our monthly spending levels will vary based on new and ongoing development and corporate activities. Because the length of time and activities associated with development of our product candidates is highly uncertain, we are unable to estimate the actual funds we will require for product development and any approved marketing and commercialization activities. Our funding requirements, both near- and long-term, as well as the timing and amount of our operating expenditures, will depend largely on:

We do not have any committed external source of funds or other support for our development efforts and we cannot be certain that additional funding will be available on acceptable terms, or at all. Until we can generate sufficient revenue to finance our cash requirements, which we may never do, we expect to finance our future cash needs through a combination of public or private equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations, strategic alliances, licensing arrangements, royalty revenues, sales or monetization of future revenue streams, marketing or distribution arrangements or other strategic transactions. If we raise additional funds through public or private equity offerings, the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect our shareholders’ rights. For example, in February of 2024, we issued an additional 20,000,000 Common Shares pursuant to the 2024 PIPE Financing, which resulted in dilution of existing shareholder equity. To the extent that

22

we raise additional capital through the sale of our common shares or securities convertible or exchangeable into our common shares, your ownership interest will be further diluted. We are party to the Amended Loan Agreement (as defined herein) with Hercules, as agent and lender, and several financial institutions. The Amended Loan Agreement subjects us to fixed payment obligations covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures or declaring dividends. For additional information, see “enGene’s Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Hercules Loan Agreement.” If we raise additional capital through debt financing, we may be subject to similar or more restrictive conditions than the conditions of the Amended Loan Agreement. If we raise additional capital through marketing and distribution arrangements or other collaborations, strategic alliances, licensing arrangements, royalty revenues, sales or monetization of future revenue streams, or strategic transactions with third parties, we may have to relinquish certain valuable rights to our product candidates, technologies, future revenue streams or research programs or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us. We also could be required to seek collaborators 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 technologies that we otherwise would seek to develop or commercialize ourselves. If we are unable to raise additional capital in sufficient amounts or on terms acceptable to us, we may have to significantly delay, scale back or discontinue the development or commercialization of one or more of our products or product candidates or one or more of our other research or development initiatives. Any of the above events could significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects and cause the price of our common shares to decline.

We face significant competition from other biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, which may result in our competitors discovering, developing or commercializing products before us or more successfully than we do. Our business and results of operations could be adversely affected if we fail to compete effectively.

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, including the development of non-viral gene therapies for administration into mucosal tissues, are characterized by rapid growth, a dynamic landscape of competitive product candidates and a strong reliance on intellectual property. We face competition from a variety of organizations, including larger pharmaceutical companies, specialty biotechnology companies, specialty medical device companies, academic research institutions, governmental agencies, as well as public and private institutions. There are several companies that are currently developing gene-based therapeutics for use in a variety of indications, from cancer to rare disease, to regenerative medicine. There are also companies and institutions developing non-gene based therapies such as, but not limited to, drug/device combinations that may be effective in the clinical indications we choose to pursue and oncology drugs.

DDX is our proprietary carrier for genetic medicines to mucosal tissues and is the foundation for our nanoparticle formulations. We developed DDX and our patented non-viral gene therapies to penetrate mucus barriers and to deliver genes to mucosal epithelial cells in a way that is re-dosable, scalable, and designed to integrate into existing clinical practice. Our gene therapy platform’s leading program is in the area of immuno- oncology and we are developing additional programs focused on diseases of the respiratory, urogenital and gastrointestinal mucosal tissues. Our lead product candidate, EG-70, for the treatment of BCG-unresponsive non-muscle invasive bladder cancer, or “NMIBC”, faces competition from numerous companies and specialty biotechnology companies.

We understand that our competitors use their gene therapy candidates in numerous therapeutic applications, some of which may directly compete with our product candidates and early-stage programs. Competing therapeutic applications include cancer, respiratory disease, metabolic diseases, various rare diseases, central nervous system disorders, neuromuscular disorders, diseases of the immune system and infectious diseases. Competitors using genetic medicines for mucosal tissues include CG Oncology, Inc. and Ferring Pharmaceuticals Inc. We also face competition outside of the gene therapeutics field, in particular for our lead indication of BCG-unresponsive NMIBC with Cis, including from some of the largest pharmaceutical companies and other specialty biotechnology companies, such as Merck & Co., Inc., AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Roche, Bristol Myers Squibb, Johnson & Johnson and Janssen.

23

In addition, many of our current or potential competitors, either alone or with their collaboration partners, have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials and marketing approved products than we do. Mergers and acquisitions in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industry may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for and participation in clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. Our commercial opportunities could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient, are more shelf-stable or are less expensive than any products that we may develop. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market, if we successfully enter it at all. The key competitive factors affecting the success of all of our programs are likely to be their efficacy, safety, convenience and availability of reimbursement.

If our current programs are approved for the indications for which we are currently planning clinical trials, they may compete with other products currently under development. We may not be aware of all competitive or potentially competitive products under development by other market participants, and information relating to such products may not be publicly accessible. Competition with other related products currently under development may include competition for clinical trial sites, patient recruitment and product sales. For additional information regarding our competition, see “Business of enGene — Competition.”

The genetic medicine field is relatively new and evolving rapidly. Because of our limited technical, financial and human resources, we are focusing our research and development efforts on our gene therapy platform and our therapeutic product candidates among many potential options. As a result, we may forego or delay pursuit of other gene therapy technologies or other therapeutic product candidates that provide significant advantages over our platform, which could materially harm our business and results of operations.

Genetic medicine is an emerging field of product development with only a small number of genetic medicines having received FDA or European Medicines Agency (“EMA”) approval to date. Our genetic medicine research programs are still at an early stage, and there remain several areas of product development risk, which pose particular uncertainty for our programs given the relatively limited development history of, and our limited prior experience with, genetic medicines. Translational science, manufacturing materials and processes, safety concerns, regulatory pathway and clinical trial design and execution all pose particular risk to our product development activities. Furthermore, the medical community’s understanding of the causes of many diseases continues to evolve and further research may change the medical community’s views on what therapies and approaches are most effective for addressing certain diseases.

As an organization, we have not previously conducted any IND-enabling studies or clinical trials, including any later stage or pivotal clinical trials. In pursuing our new technologies, we have begun to establish our own genetic medicine technical capabilities, but we will need to continue to expand those capabilities by either hiring internally or seeking assistance from outside service providers. Genetic medicine is an area of significant investment by biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies and there may be a scarcity of talent available to us in these areas. If we are not able to expand our genetic medicine capabilities, we may not be able to develop in the way we intend or desire any promising product candidates that emerge from our program, which would limit our prospects for future growth. We may require more time and incur greater costs than our competitors and may not succeed in obtaining regulatory approvals of product candidates that we may develop. We may also rely on third-party vendors or service providers, including contract research organizations (“CROs”), among others who may fail to meet their commitments to us or deliver their products to us. We may also be forced to rely on a single such provider with no redundancy or alternative. Failure to commence or complete, or delays in our clinical trials, could prevent us from or delay us in commercializing our product candidates.

24

Because we have limited financial and managerial resources, we focus on research programs and on gene therapy technologies and product candidates that we identify for specific indications among many potential options. As a result, we may forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates or for other indications that later prove to have greater commercial potential, or we may choose to focus our efforts and resources on a potential product candidate that ultimately proves to be unsuccessful. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development programs and product candidates for specific indications may not yield any commercially viable products. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through collaboration, licensing or other arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such product candidate. Failure to pursue opportunities with greater commercial potential or relinquishing valuable rights to product candidates may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Our gene therapy platform is based on novel technologies that are unproven, which makes it difficult to predict the time and cost of development and of subsequently obtaining regulatory approval, if at all.

We have concentrated our research and development efforts on our gene therapy platform, and our future success depends on the successful development and maintenance of our platform.

However, the technologies that comprise our platform are new and largely unproven. These technologies have not been clinically tested and the scientific and clinical evidence to support the feasibility of developing product candidates based on those technologies in pursuit of regulatory approval and potential commercial viability and success, may be considered preliminary and limited. Successful development of product candidates by us will require solving a number of issues, including proving the safety and efficacy of our treatments for BCG-unresponsive NMIBC and expanding our mucosal tissue delivery system to treat patient tissues beyond the bladder, such as respiratory, urogenital and gastrointestinal mucosal tissues. There can be no assurance we will be successful in solving any or all of these issues. We have concentrated our research efforts to date on developing the components of our gene therapy platform, and our future success is highly dependent on the successful development of our proprietary carrier for genetic medicines to mucosal tissues, therapeutic applications of such technology and the advancement of additional programs focused on diseases of the respiratory, urogenital and gastrointestinal mucosal tissues. We may decide to alter or abandon our initial programs as new data become available and we gain experience in developing our therapeutics. We cannot be sure that our technologies will yield satisfactory products that are safe and effective, scalable or profitable in any indication we pursue.

There can be no assurance that any development problems we experience in the future related to our gene therapy platform will not cause significant delays or unanticipated costs, or that such development problems can be solved. We may also experience delays in developing sustainable, reproducible and scalable manufacturing processes or transferring such processes to any commercial partners, which may prevent us from initiating or conducting clinical trials or commercializing our products on a timely or profitable basis, if at all. We may also fail to build redundancy in these manufacturing processes, such that we will be vulnerable to third-party provider failures that may impair the supply of or manufacture of critical materials, products, or reagents. In addition, the clinical trial requirements of the FDA, the EMA and other regulatory agencies and the criteria these regulators use to determine the safety and efficacy of a product candidate vary substantially according to the type, complexity, novelty and intended use and market of the potential products. The regulatory approval process for novel product candidates can be more expensive and take longer than for other, better known or extensively studied pharmaceutical or other product candidates. FDA’s regulatory guidance documents, including those that may be applicable to enGene’s programs, may change, be cancelled or evolve. Only a small number of gene therapies have successfully reached the clinical trial phase of development or beyond, limiting insight into the regulatory review process for this field of genetic medicine. As a result, it is difficult to determine how long it will take or how much it will cost to obtain regulatory approvals in either the United States or the European

25

Union for any product candidates we may develop or how long it will take to commercialize any product candidate that receives marketing approval.

Development of new therapeutics involves a lengthy and expensive process, with an uncertain outcome. We may incur additional costs, fail to replicate the positive results from our earlier preclinical or clinical studies of our product candidates in later preclinical studies and any clinical trials or experience delays in completing or ultimately be unable to complete, the development and commercialization of any product candidates.

To obtain the requisite regulatory approvals to commercialize any product candidates, we must demonstrate through extensive preclinical studies and clinical trials that our products are safe and effective. Many of our product candidates are in early stages of development and thus their risk of failure is high. Before we can commence clinical trials for a product candidate, we must complete extensive preclinical studies that support our filed and planned INDs in the United States, or similar applications in other jurisdictions. We cannot be certain of the timely completion or outcome of our preclinical studies and cannot predict if the FDA or other regulatory authorities will accept our proposed clinical programs or if the outcome of our preclinical studies will ultimately support the further development of our product candidates. As a result, we cannot be sure that we will be able to submit INDs or similar applications for our preclinical 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.

Clinical trials are expensive, difficult to design and implement, can take many years to complete, and their outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during, or even after, the clinical trial process and our ongoing and future clinical results may not be successful. We may be unable to establish clinical endpoints that applicable regulatory authorities would consider clinically meaningful and a clinical trial can fail at any stage of testing. Similarly, if regulatory authorities agree, implicitly or explicitly, that a certain set of clinical endpoints is clinically meaningful or adequate to demonstrate safety and efficacy, they may change their determination at a later date. The outcome of preclinical studies and early clinical trials may not be predictive of the success of later clinical trials and interim results of a clinical trial do not necessarily predict final results. Differences in trial design between early-stage clinical trials and later-stage clinical trials make it difficult to extrapolate the results of earlier clinical trials to later clinical trials. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing approval of their products.

Successful completion of clinical trials is a prerequisite to submitting a BLA to the FDA and similar marketing applications to other regulatory authorities, for each product candidate and, consequently, the ultimate approval and commercial marketing of any product candidates. We do not know whether any of our clinical trials will be completed on schedule, if at all.

We may experience delays in initiating or completing clinical trials and preclinical studies. We also may experience numerous unforeseen events during, or as a result of, any ongoing and future clinical trials that we conduct that could delay or prevent our ability to receive marketing approval or commercialize our product candidates, including that:

26

We could also encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended, placed on clinical hold or terminated by us, the IRBs of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted, or the FDA or other regulatory authorities or recommended for suspension or termination by the Data Safety Monitoring Board, for such trial. 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 or other regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a product or treatment, 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. Further, the FDA or other regulatory authorities may disagree with our clinical trial design and our interpretation of data from clinical trials, or may change the requirements for approval even after they have reviewed and commented on the design for our clinical trials. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses and many companies that believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials nonetheless failed to obtain FDA approval.

Our product development costs will increase if we experience delays in clinical testing or marketing approvals. Our preclinical studies or clinical trials may not begin as planned, may need to be restructured or may not be completed on schedule, or at all. Significant preclinical studies or clinical trial delays also could shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates and may allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do, potentially impairing our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and harming our business and results of operations. Any delays in our preclinical or clinical development programs may harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Interim top-line and preliminary data from our clinical trials that we announce or publish from time to time will change as more patient data become available and are subject to audit and verification procedures that could result in material changes in the final data.

From time to time, we may publish interim top-line or preliminary results from our clinical trials. Interim results from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes

27

may materially change as participant enrollment continues and more participant data become available. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations, and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully evaluate all data. Preliminary or top-line results also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we have previously published. As a result, interim and preliminary data should be expected to change as additional patient data become available and as such new data and/or existing data is audited and verified; all data should viewed with caution until the final data is available. Adverse differences between preliminary or interim data and final data could be material and could significantly harm our reputation and business prospects and may cause the trading price of our common shares to fluctuate significantly.

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

The timely completion of clinical trials in accordance with their protocols depends, among other things, on our ability to enroll a sufficient number of patients who remain in the trial until its conclusion. We have from time to time experienced and may in the future experience difficulties in patient enrollment in our clinical trials for a variety of reasons, including:

An addition, our 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 patients available to us because some patients who might have opted to enroll in our trials may instead opt to enroll in a trial being conducted by one of our competitors. Because the number of qualified clinical investigators is limited, we may conduct some of our clinical trials at the same clinical trial sites that some of our competitors use, which would reduce the number of patients who are available for our clinical trials at such clinical trial sites.

Even if we are able to enroll a sufficient number of patients in our clinical trials, delays in patient 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 ability to advance the development of our product candidates.

28

Use of our novel gene therapy platform and therapeutic product candidates could result in or be associated with harmful side effects, adverse events or other safety risks, which could cause us to delay, suspend or discontinue their clinical trials and/or development or abandon them, delay or prevent their regulatory approval, limit their commercial potential, if approved, or result in other significant negative consequences (including voluntary corrective actions or agency enforcement actions) that could severely harm our business and results of operations. In addition, these harmful side effects, adverse events or other safety risks may not be appropriately recognized or managed by our treating staff, which could result in litigation and reputational damage.

Our product candidates may be associated with harmful side effects, adverse events or other safety risks. Results of clinical trials could reveal severe or recurring side effects, toxicities or unexpected events, including death. There may also be delayed adverse events that may not be appropriately recognized or managed by our treating staff, which could result in litigation and reputational damage. We expect to have to train medical personnel using any product candidates we may develop to understand the side effect profiles for our clinical trials and upon any commercialization of such product candidates. Inadequate training in recognizing or managing the potential side effects of such product candidates could result in patient injury or death.

If any such events occur, clinical trials or commercial distribution of any product candidates or products we develop could be suspended or terminated, and our business and reputation may be substantially harmed. Treatment-related side effects could affect patient recruitment and the ability of enrolled patients to complete the trial or result in potential liability claims. Regulatory authorities could order us to cease further development of, deny approval of or require us to cease selling any product candidates or products for any or all targeted indications. If we elect, or are required, to delay, suspend or terminate any clinical trial or commercialization efforts, the commercial prospects of such product candidates or products may be harmed, and our ability to generate product revenues from them or other product candidates that we develop may be delayed or eliminated.

Additionally, if we successfully develop a product candidate and it receives marketing approval, the FDA could require us to adopt a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (“REMS”) 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 communication plan to health care practitioners, patient education, extensive patient monitoring or distribution systems and processes that are highly controlled, restrictive and more costly than what is typical for the industry. We may also be required to adopt a REMS or engage in similar actions, such as patient education, certification of health care professionals or specific monitoring, if we and others later identify undesirable side effects caused by any product that we develop. Such identification could also have several additional significant negative consequences, such as:

29

Even if any of our current or future therapeutic product candidates receives regulatory approval, they may fail to achieve the degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors (including government health administration authorities and private health insurers) and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success, in which case we may not generate significant revenues and become profitable, which could adversely affect our ability to conduct our business and our results of operations.

The commercial success of any of our product candidates will depend upon its degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors, and others in the medical community. Even if any product candidates developed by us receives regulatory approval, they may nonetheless fail to gain sufficient market acceptance by physicians, patients, healthcare payors, and others in the medical community. The degree of market acceptance of any product candidates we may develop, if approved for commercial sale, will depend on a number of factors, including:

If any product candidate developed by us does not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, healthcare payors, patients and the medical community, we will not be able to generate significant revenue, and may not become or remain profitable. The failure of any product candidates to find market acceptance could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

30

Negative developments in the field of gene therapy, intravesical or NMIBC therapeutic development could damage public perception of any product candidates that we develop, which could adversely affect our ability to conduct our business and our results of operations, or to obtain regulatory approvals for such product candidates.

Our novel gene therapy platform is comprised of new and largely unproven technologies, with no gene therapeutic product candidates approved to date. Gene therapeutics may not gain the acceptance of the public or the medical community and/or they may not gain the acceptance of the public or medical community within our indications of interest or development areas. To date, several other efforts to leverage gene therapy technologies have generally demonstrated an inability to generate predictable results or to manufacture products at suitable scale to treat more than a small number of patients.

Our success will depend on our ability to demonstrate that our gene therapy platform, product candidates and related services can overcome these challenges.

If one of our current or future product candidates is unable to successfully treat the intended organ or lesion and establish proof of concept in a certain disease, it may indicate that we will not be able to apply our gene therapy platform to other diseases affecting the intended tissue area or other areas. This may also indicate a decrease in the probability of our success for other targets using the same modality in the same or different cell types, as well as our engineered approach and delivery approach, more generally. Such failures could negatively affect the public or medical community’s perception of our gene therapy platform and gene therapeutics in general.

Additionally, our success will depend upon physicians who specialize in the treatment of diseases targeted by our product candidates, if approved, prescribing treatments that involve the use of our product candidates, if approved, in lieu of, or in addition to, existing treatments with which they are more familiar and for which greater clinical data may be available. Adverse events in clinical trials of our product candidates or in clinical trials of others developing similar products and the resulting publicity, as well as any other adverse events in the field of gene therapeutics, could result in a decrease in demand for any product that we may develop. These events could also result in the suspension, discontinuation, or clinical hold of, or modification to, our clinical trials. Any future negative developments in the field of gene therapy could also result in greater governmental regulation, stricter labeling requirements and potential regulatory delays in the testing or approvals of our product candidates. Any increased scrutiny could delay or increase the costs of obtaining marketing approval for any of our product candidates.

We may not be successful in our efforts to utilize our novel gene therapy platform to identify and develop additional product candidates. Due to our limited technical, financial and human resources and access to capital, we may choose to prioritize development of certain product candidates, such as our initial focus on developing EG-70, which may prove to be the wrong choice and may adversely affect our business and results of operations.

A key element of our strategy is utilizing our gene therapy platform to generate multiple product candidates. Although we intend to develop numerous product candidates targeting various cell types and indications and carrying different biologically active drug molecules, in addition to the product candidates we are currently developing, we may fail to identify viable new product candidates for clinical development for a number of reasons. For example, while we believe our genetic therapy platform is capable of transfecting many different tissue types with varied genetic cargos, such as nucleic acid therapeutics (e.g., DNA), antisense oligonucleotides, siRNA, miRNA, mRNA, gene therapy and gene editing mechanisms, we have not yet successfully advanced any proprietary enGene developed drug candidate incorporating these cargoes into clinical trials beyond EG-70, and we may not be successful in developing products to effectively employ these types of cargoes or molecules. If we fail to identify additional potential product candidates, our business could be materially harmed.

Research programs to pursue the development of our product candidates and using our gene therapy platform to design and identify new product candidates and disease targets require substantial technical, financial and human resources whether or not they are ultimately successful. Our gene therapy platform and research

31

programs may initially show promise in identifying potential indications and/or product candidates, yet fail to yield results for clinical development for a number of reasons, including:

If any of these events occur, we may be forced to abandon our research or development efforts for a program or programs, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Accordingly, there can be no assurance that we will ever be able to identify additional therapeutic opportunities for our product candidates or to develop suitable potential product candidates through internal research programs, which could materially adversely affect our future growth and prospects. We may focus our efforts and resources on potential product candidates or other potential programs that ultimately prove to be unsuccessful, which would be costly and time-consuming.

Our use of third parties to manufacture, develop and test our therapeutic product candidates for preclinical studies and clinical trials increases the risk that we will not have sufficient quantities of our product candidates or products, or necessary quantities of such materials on time or at an acceptable cost.

We do not currently have, nor do we plan to acquire, the infrastructure or capability internally to manufacture drug supplies for our ongoing clinical trials or any future clinical trials that we may conduct, and we lack the resources to internally manufacture any product candidates on a commercial scale. We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third-party manufacturers to produce our product candidates or other product candidates that we may identify for clinical trials, as well as for commercial manufacture if any product candidates receive marketing authorization and approval. We rely entirely on numerous third-party suppliers to provide us with various product components. We may not have alternative suppliers for certain of these product components. Any significant delay or discontinuity in the supply of a product candidate, or the raw material components thereof, for an ongoing clinical trial due to the need to replace a third-party manufacturer or testing laboratory could considerably delay the clinical development and potential regulatory authorization of our product candidates, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. We currently do not have relationships with alternate third-party contract manufacturers and testing laboratories for our critical raw materials and product candidates that could sustain our operations in the event we experience a disruption of service from our existing third-party contract manufacturers and testing laboratories. As a result, we are materially reliant on our existing contract manufacturers and testing laboratories and susceptible to material operational disruptions due to factors that may be unknown to us and unforeseeable. Our providers may also materially change the terms of our commercial arrangements for any reason or no reason, which could adversely affect our materials costs, ability to manufacture the drug at a sustainable cost, and profit margin on any sales.

We may be unable to identify and appropriately qualify third-party manufacturers and testing laboratories or establish agreements with third-party manufacturers and testing laboratories or do so on acceptable terms. Even if we are able to establish agreements with third-party manufacturers and testing laboratories, reliance on third- party manufacturers entails additional risks, including:

32

Furthermore, our contract manufacturing organizations (“CMOs”) and testing laboratories are engaged with other companies to supply and/or manufacture and/or test materials or products, which exposes our manufacturers and testing laboratories to regulatory risks for the production and testing of such materials and products. The facilities used by our CMOs to manufacture and/or test our product candidates are subject to review by the FDA and other non-U.S. authorities pursuant to inspections that will be conducted after we submit an NDA, or other marketing application to the FDA and other non-U.S. authorities. We do not directly control or conduct the manufacturing and testing of any material or products. Therefore, we are materially dependent on our CMO partners and contract testing laboratories to operate in compliance with the regulatory requirements, known as current good manufacturing practice (“cGMP”) requirements for manufacture of drug and device products or similar requirements outside the United States. If our CMOs and contract testing laboratories cannot successfully manufacture and/or test material that conforms to our specifications and the strict regulatory requirements of the FDA or others, we will not be able to secure or maintain regulatory authorization for our product candidates manufactured at these manufacturing facilities, resulting in delay or failure in the clinical development and commercialization of our products, which would have a material adverse effect on us. In addition, we have no control over the ability of our CMOs to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel. If the FDA, or another non-U.S. regulatory agency does not approve these facilities for the manufacture and/or testing of our product candidates or if any agency withdraws its approval in the future, we may need to find alternative manufacturing facilities, which would negatively impact our ability to develop and deliver our products to markets around the world.

Our product candidates may compete with other product candidates and marketed products for access to manufacturing and/or testing facilities. Any performance failure on the part of our existing or future CMOs could delay clinical development, marketing approval or commercialization. Our current and anticipated future dependence upon others for the manufacturing of our product candidates may adversely affect our future profit margins and our ability to commercialize any product candidates that receive marketing approval on a timely and competitive basis.

33

Our most advanced product candidates are complex to manufacture and we may encounter difficulties in production, particularly with respect to scaling our manufacturing capabilities. If we or any of our third-party manufacturers with whom we contract encounter these types of difficulties, our ability to provide supply of our product candidates for clinical trials or our products for patients, if approved, could be delayed or stopped, or we may be unable to maintain a commercially viable cost structure.

The manufacturing processes used to produce our product candidates are complex and novel and have not been validated for clinical or commercial production. As a result of these complexities, the cost to manufacture our product candidates is generally higher than traditional biopharmaceutical compounds and the manufacturing processes may prove to be less reliable and may be more difficult to reproduce. For example, for EG-70 we must separately manufacture a novel plasmid DNA drug substance (DS), a novel co-polymer excipient (DDX) and a novel block co-polymer excipient (PEG-b-PLE). We then combine those ingredients in the drug product manufacturing process. There are many points throughout this process, and the manufacturing processes of our other product candidates, that can lead to failure. Failure in the production of any of our product candidates could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Some examples of manufacturing challenges and potential failure we may encounter follow:

Our manufacturing processes are also susceptible to product loss or failure due to logistical issues associated with multiple outsourced activities across the range of manufacturing, shipping of materials to analytical laboratories, cold chain distribution to where products will be administered to patients, interruptions in the manufacturing processes, contamination, equipment or reagent failure, improper installation or operation of equipment, vendor or operator error, and variability of product characteristics. Even minor deviations from normal manufacturing processes could result in reduced production yields, lot failures, product defects, product recalls, product liability claims and other supply disruptions. If microbial, viral or other contaminations are discovered in our product candidates or in the manufacturing facilities in which our product candidates are made, the manufacturing facilities may need to be closed for an extended period of time to investigate and remedy the contamination, which could result in our inability to produce or ship product. Further, as product candidates are developed through preclinical to later-stage clinical trials toward approval and commercialization, it is common that various aspects of the development program, such as manufacturing methods, are altered in an effort to optimize processes and results. If we make these types of changes, we may not achieve our 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.

Although we continue to optimize our manufacturing processes, doing so is difficult and uncertain. There are risks associated with scaling to the level required for advanced clinical trials or commercialization, including, among other things, cost overruns, potential problems with process scale-out, process reproducibility, stability issues, lot consistency and timely availability of reagents or raw materials. If we are unable to adequately validate or scale-up our manufacturing processes with our current manufacturing partners, we will need to transfer such processes to another manufacturing partner and complete the manufacturing validation process,

34

which can be a lengthy process. We ultimately may not be successful completing the transfer of our manufacturing processes to one or more of the manufacturers on whom we rely. The manufacturers who become responsible for our processes may not have the necessary capabilities to complete the implementation and development processes to our specifications or standards. If we are able to adequately validate and scale-up a particular manufacturing process for our product candidates with a contract manufacturer, we will still need to negotiate an agreement for commercial supply with that contract manufacturer and it is not certain we will be able to come to agreement on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. As a result, we may ultimately be unable to reduce the cost of goods for our product candidates to levels that will allow for an attractive return on investment if and when those product candidates are approved and commercialized.

The manufacturing processes for any products that we may develop are subject to the FDA and non-U.S. regulatory authority approval processes, and we will need to contract with manufacturers who we believe can meet applicable FDA and non-U.S. regulatory authority requirements on an ongoing basis. If we or our CMOs are unable to reliably produce products to specifications acceptable to the FDA or other regulatory authorities, we may not obtain or maintain the approvals we need to commercialize our products. Even if we obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, there is no assurance that either we or our CMOs will be able to manufacture the approved product to specifications and under required good manufacturing practices acceptable to the FDA 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, increase our cost of goods and have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Our future success depends on our ability to manufacture our products on a timely basis with acceptable manufacturing costs, while at the same time maintaining good quality control and complying with applicable regulatory requirements, and an inability to do so could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In addition, we could incur higher manufacturing costs if manufacturing processes or standards change, and we could need to replace, modify, design or build and install equipment, all of which would require additional capital expenditures. Specifically, because our product candidates may have a higher cost of goods than conventional therapies, and may require long-term follow up evaluations, the risk that coverage and reimbursement rates may be inadequate for us to achieve profitability may be greater.

In addition, the FDA, the EMA and other non-U.S. regulatory authorities may require us to submit 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 or other non-U.S. regulatory authorities may require that we not distribute a lot until the relevant agency authorizes its release. Slight deviations in our manufacturing processes, including those affecting quality attributes and stability, may result in unacceptable changes in the product that could result in lot failures or product recalls. Lot failures or product recalls could cause us to delay product launches or clinical trials, which could be costly to us and otherwise harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Problems in our manufacturing processes could restrict our ability to meet market demand for our products.

Any problems in our manufacturing processes or facilities at our CMOs could make us a less attractive collaborator for potential partners, including larger pharmaceutical companies and academic research institutions, which could limit our access to additional attractive development programs.

We have no experience in developing a manufacturing facility for our biologic products and may never be successful in developing our own manufacturing facility or capability.

We expect to evaluate the possibility of establishing our own capabilities and infrastructure, including a manufacturing facility. If we choose to build our own manufacturing facility, we will need significant funding

35

and will need to select an adequate location. We expect that development of our own manufacturing facility would provide us with enhanced control of material supply for both clinical trials and the commercial market, enable the more rapid implementation of process changes, and allow for better long-term margins. However, we have no experience in developing a manufacturing facility and may never be successful in developing our own manufacturing facility or capability. If we determine to establish our own manufacturing capabilities and infrastructure, we will also need to hire additional personnel to manage our operations and facilities and develop the necessary infrastructure to continue the research and development, and eventual commercialization, if approved, of our product candidates. If we 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 curtailed or delayed. We may establish multiple manufacturing facilities as we expand our commercial footprint to multiple geographies, which may lead to regulatory delays or could prove costly. Even if we are successful, any manufacturing capabilities we develop could be affected by cost-overruns, unexpected delays, equipment failures, labor shortages, natural disasters, power failures and numerous other factors that could prevent us from realizing the intended benefits of our manufacturing strategy and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Changes in product candidate manufacturing or formulation may result in additional costs or delay, which could adversely affect our business and results of operations.

As product candidates are developed through preclinical studies to later-stage clinical trials toward approval and commercialization, it is common that various aspects of the development program, such as manufacturing methods or formulation, are altered along the way in an effort to optimize processes and results. Any of these changes could cause our product candidates to perform differently and affect the results of ongoing or planned clinical trials or other future clinical trials conducted with the altered materials. In addition, such changes and any other similar changes in the future may also require additional testing or notification to or approval by the FDA or other regulatory authorities. This could delay completion of clinical trials, require the conduct of bridging clinical trials or studies, require the repetition of one or more clinical trials, increase clinical trial costs, delay approval of our product candidates and/or jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenue.

Our most advanced product candidates are complex to analyze and we may encounter difficulties in product release testing, particularly with respect to bioassay potency testing. If we or any of our contract testing laboratories encounter difficulties, our ability to provide supply of our product candidates for clinical trials or our products for patients, if approved, could be delayed or stopped, or we may be unable to maintain a commercially viable cost structure.

The analytical methods used to test our product candidates are complex and many are novel and have not been validated for clinical or commercial production. For example, in addition to several complex physico-chemical tests for EG-70, DS and novel excipients, we must also test EG-70 and the DS for biological potency using multiple unique cell-based assays. We rely on third-party laboratories to develop and conduct these assays. These assays may be subject to inherent variability and limitations such as, but not limited to, variations in assay conditions, reagents, equipment, or interpretation of results that could lead to inconsistent or inaccurate measurements of potency. Inaccurate potency assessments may affect our ability to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of our drug product to regulatory authorities, potentially resulting in regulatory delays, additional testing requirements, or even rejection of our product. Furthermore, changes in regulatory guidelines or evolving scientific understanding may necessitate modifications to the biological potency assays, requiring additional validation studies and potential delays in the development or commercialization of our product candidates. It is important to note that despite our efforts to ensure the accuracy and reliability of these assays, there may be factors beyond our control that could impact their effectiveness, thereby affecting the overall success of our product candidates.

Although we continue to optimize our testing methods, doing so is a difficult and uncertain task, and there are risks associated with developing these methods to the level required for advanced clinical trials and

36

commercialization, including, among other things, cost overruns, potential problems with reproducibility, stability issues, consistency and timely availability of reagents or raw materials needed to execute the testing. If we are unable to adequately validate testing methods with our current testing laboratories, we will need to transfer to another laboratory and complete the analytical validation process, which can be a lengthy process. We ultimately may not be successful in transferring the analytical methods to contract testing laboratories and the selected contract laboratories may not have the necessary capabilities to complete the implementation and validation process for the assays. If we are able to adequately transfer and validate testing methods for our product candidates with a contract laboratory, we will still need to negotiate a service agreement with that contract laboratory and it is not certain we will be able to come to agreement on terms acceptable to us. As a result, we may ultimately be unable to reduce the cost of goods for our product candidates to levels that will allow for an attractive return on investment if and when those product candidates are approved and commercialized.

The analytical testing methods for any products that we may develop are subject to the FDA and non-U.S. regulatory authority approval processes, and we will need to contract with laboratories we believe can meet applicable FDA and non-U.S. regulatory authority requirements on an ongoing basis. If we or our CMOs are unable to reliably test products in a manner acceptable to the FDA or other regulatory authorities, we may not obtain or maintain the approvals we need to commercialize our products. Even if we obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, there is no assurance that either we or our CMOs will be able to test the approved product in a manner required by good manufacturing practices acceptable to the FDA or other regulatory authorities, to test products with sufficient throughput 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, increase our cost of goods and have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Our future success depends on our ability to test our products on a timely basis with acceptable costs, while at the same time maintaining good quality control and complying with applicable regulatory requirements, and an inability to do so could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In addition, we could incur higher testing costs if testing methods or standards change, and we could need to replace, modify, design or build and install equipment, all of which would require additional capital expenditure. Specifically, because our product candidates may have a higher testing requirement than conventional therapies, the risk that coverage and reimbursement rates may be inadequate for us to achieve profitability may be greater.

The market opportunities for our product candidates may be limited to a small group of patients who are ineligible for or have failed prior treatments and our estimates of the prevalence of our target patient populations may be inaccurate.

Cancer and other disease therapies are sometimes characterized as first-line, second-line or third-line and the FDA often approves new therapies initially only for third-line use. When cancers are detected they are treated with first line of therapy with the intention of curing the cancer. This treatment generally consists of chemotherapy, radiation, antibody drugs, tumor targeted small molecules, or a combination of these. If the patient’s cancer relapses, then the patient is given a second line or third line therapy, which can consist of more chemotherapy, radiation, antibody drugs, tumor targeted small molecules, or a combination of these. Generally, the higher the line of therapy, the lower the chance of a cure. With third or higher line, the goal of the therapy is to control the growth of the tumor and extend the life of the patient, as a cure is unlikely to happen. Patients are generally referred to clinical trials in these situations. Initial approvals for new cancer and other disease therapies are often restricted to later lines of therapy for patients with advanced or metastatic disease, limiting the number of patients who may be eligible for such new therapies, which may include our product candidates.

Our lead product candidate, EG-70, is being developed to treat patients with BCG-unresponsive NMIBC. Our projections of both the number of people who have the disease we are targeting, as well as the subset of

37

people with these diseases in a position to receive our therapies, if approved, are based on our beliefs and estimates. These estimates have been derived from a variety of sources, including scientific literature, input from key opinion leaders, patient foundations or secondary market research databases and may prove to be incorrect. Further, new studies may change the estimated incidence or prevalence of these diseases. The number of patients 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 we obtain significant market share for our product candidates, because certain of the potential target populations may be small, we may never achieve profitability without obtaining regulatory approval for additional indications. For example, we believe there are approximately 60,000 new patients globally each year with BCG-unresponsive NMIBC with limited available therapies. The prevalence of patients experiencing this condition implies high unmet medical need. If the market opportunities for any product candidates we may develop are smaller than we believe they are, our potential revenues may be adversely affected and our business may be harmed.

We rely on our senior management team and key personnel, and our business could be harmed if we are unable to attract and retain personnel necessary for our success.

Our success depends on the skills, experience and performance of members of our senior management team and key personnel. The individual and collective efforts of these and other members of our senior management team and key personnel will be important as we continue to develop product candidates, establish strategic partnerships and build out our operations. The loss or incapacity of existing members of our executive management team and key personnel could adversely affect our operations if we experience difficulties in hiring qualified successors. We expect to continue expanding our senior management team in a manner commensurate with our needs as a public, clinical-stage biotechnology company. If we are not successful in attracting and retaining highly qualified personnel, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be harmed.

If we do not successfully manage the transition associated with the pending resignation of Jason D. Hanson, our Chief Executive Officer, and the appointment of a new Chief Executive Officer, it could have an adverse impact on our business.

On February 14, 2024, we announced that Jason D. Hanson, our Chief Executive Officer, had informed the Company of his intent to resign from his positions as Chief Executive Officer and as a member of our Board, as well as positions at our subsidiaries. Mr. Hanson’s decision to resign is due to personal family and health reasons and was not the result of any dispute or disagreement with the Company or our Board on any matter relating to our operations, policies or practices. Our Board has engaged an executive search firm to assist in a comprehensive search for a successor Chief Executive Officer of the Company. On February 13, 2024, we entered into a Transition Agreement with Mr. Hanson. Pursuant to the Transition Agreement, Mr. Hanson agreed to continue his roles as our Chief Executive Officer and as a member of our Board, together with any roles held at our subsidiaries, until the appointment of a successor Chief Executive Officer of the Company.

Leadership transitions can be inherently difficult to manage. An inadequate transition to a new Chief Executive Officer may result in the loss of institutional knowledge and changes to business strategy or objectives. In addition, these changes have the potential to negatively impact our operations and relationships with employees, customers and investors due to increased or unanticipated expenses, operational inefficiencies, uncertainty regarding changes in strategy, decreased employee morale and productivity and increased turnover. In addition, if we are unable to attract and retain a qualified candidate to become our new Chief Executive Officer in a timely manner, our ability to meet our financial and operational goals and strategic plans may be adversely impacted, as well as our financial performance. This may also make it more difficult for us to retain and hire key management and other team members.

For additional information regarding the pending resignation of our Chief Executive Officer and related Transition Agreement, see “Summary of the Prospectus — Recent Developments — Jason D. Hanson’s Transition”.

38

Our research and development initiatives, manufacturing processes and business depend on our ability to attract and retain highly skilled scientists and other specialized individuals. We may not be able to attract or retain such qualified scientists and other specialized individuals in the future due to the competition for qualified personnel among life science and technology businesses.

Our research and development initiatives, laboratory operations and manufacturing processes depend on our ability to attract and retain highly skilled and experienced scientists, clinical personnel, technicians, engineers, quality-control and manufacturing personnel. We may not be able to attract or retain qualified scientists, clinical personnel, technicians or engineers in the future due to the competition for qualified personnel among life science and technology businesses. We also face competition from universities and public and private research institutions in recruiting and retaining highly qualified scientific personnel. Additionally, we may be unable to identify, hire and retain the experienced scientific, quality-control and manufacturing personnel needed to transfer our manufacturing processes and test methods to CMOs and external testing laboratories. Further, if we endeavor to conduct manufacturing processes internally, we may be unable to identify, hire or retain the personnel needed to conduct our manufacturing processes, which could result in delays in production or difficulties in maintaining compliance with applicable regulatory requirements. We may have difficulties locating, recruiting or retaining qualified personnel across functions that we deem critical to our success. Recruiting, training and retention difficulties can limit our ability to support our research and development and commercialization efforts. All of our employees are at-will, which means that either we or the employee may terminate their employment at any time.

In addition, we rely on consultants and advisors, including scientific and clinical advisors, to assist us in formulating our research and development, regulatory and commercialization strategy. Our consultants and advisors may provide services to other organizations 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 consultants or advisors might impede the achievement of our research, development, regulatory and commercialization objectives.

We cannot assure you that we will be able to adequately address these additional risks. If we are unable to do so, our operations might suffer.

We face risks related to epidemics and other outbreaks of communicable diseases, such as the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, which could significantly disrupt our operations, including our clinical trials and preclinical studies, and adversely affect our business and results of operations.

Public health crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic or similar outbreaks, could have an adverse effect our business. Quarantines, travel restrictions and other public health and safety measures implemented in response to a pandemic, including a resurgence of COVID-19, could adversely impact our operations, and the ultimate impact is highly uncertain and cannot be predicted with confidence. Effects of a pandemic, including a resurgence of COVID-19, that may delay or otherwise adversely affect our ongoing and planned preclinical activities, our planned clinical trials as well as our business generally, include:

39

Any of these effects, and other effects of a pandemic, including a resurgence of COVID-19, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Further, uncertainty around these and related issues could lead to adverse effects on the economy of the United States, Canada, and other economies, which could impact our ability to raise the necessary capital needed to develop and commercialize our programs and product candidates.

We or the third parties upon whom we depend may be adversely affected by risks beyond our control, such as natural disasters, political crises, acts of terrorism, epidemics and other outbreaks of communicable diseases, war or other catastrophic events and our business continuity and disaster recovery plans may not adequately protect us from the adverse effects of such events.

We, our suppliers and third-party service providers are vulnerable to damage from natural disasters, including but not limited to earthquakes, fires or floods, power loss, communications failures, public health crises, such as pandemics and epidemics, political crises, such as terrorism, war, political instability or other conflict and similar events. If any such disaster were to occur, our ability to operate our business at any of our facilities could be adversely affected.

If a natural disaster, power outage or other event occurred that prevented us from using all or a significant portion of our headquarters or other facilities, that damaged critical infrastructure, such as our enterprise financial systems or manufacturing resource planning and enterprise quality systems, or that otherwise disrupted operations, it may be difficult or, in certain cases, impossible, for us to continue our business for a substantial period of time.

For example, in late February 2022, Russian military forces launched its significant military invasion of Ukraine. The impact to Ukraine, as well as actions taken by other countries, including new and stricter sanctions by the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, the European Union and other countries and organizations against certain officials, individuals, regions, and industries in Russia, Belarus and occupied areas of Ukraine, and each country’s potential response to such sanctions, tensions, and military actions could continue to have a material adverse effect on the global economy and political situation.

As of the date of this prospectus, we (i) are not conducting clinical or non-clinical studies in Ukraine, Belarus or Russia, (ii) are not relying upon service providers or vendors from any of these regions to advance our product development programs, (iii) do not source biomanufacturing critical raw materials, equipment, or other supplies directly from Ukraine, Belarus or Russia, and (iv) are not aware nor have we received notification from our supply vendors that the sourcing of any general laboratory or manufacturing materials may be negatively impacted due to such conflict and related sanctions.

The disaster recovery and business continuity plans we have in place currently are limited and are unlikely to prove adequate in the event of a serious disaster or similar event. We may incur substantial expenses as a result of the limited nature of our disaster recovery and business continuity plans, which, particularly when taken together with our lack of earthquake insurance, could have a material adverse effect on our business.

40

Furthermore, integral parties in our supply chain are similarly vulnerable to natural disasters or other sudden, unforeseen and severe adverse events. If such an event were to affect our supply chain, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Regulatory Risks

Nearly all aspects of our activity and our products and services are subject to extensive regulation by various U.S. federal and state agencies and regulatory bodies in non-U.S. jurisdictions, and compliance with existing or future regulations could result in unanticipated expenses or limit our ability to offer our products and services. Once developed, our gene therapy platform and therapeutic product candidates will require regulatory approval, which is a lengthy, expensive, and inherently unpredictable process with uncertain outcomes and cost and the potential for substantial delays. We cannot give any assurance whether or when our product candidates will receive regulatory approval, which is necessary before they can be commercialized.

Regulatory requirements governing gene and cell therapy products, and in particular any novel gene therapy products we may develop, have changed frequently and may continue to change in the future. We are aware of a limited number of gene therapy products that have received marketing authorization from the FDA and EMA. Even with respect to more established products in the gene therapy field, the regulatory landscape is still developing. In 2016, the FDA established the Office of Tissues and Advanced Therapies (“OTAT”) within its Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research to consolidate the review of gene therapy and related products, and has established the Cellular, Tissue and Gene Therapies Advisory Committee, among others, to advise this review. In September 2022, the FDA announced retitling of OTAT to the Office of Therapeutic Products (“OTP”) and elevation of OTP to a “Super Office” to meet its growing cell and gene therapy workload. Gene therapy clinical trials conducted at institutions that receive funding for recombinant DNA research from the U.S. National Institutes of Health (“NIH”), also are potentially subject to review by the Office of Biotechnology Activities’ Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee (“RAC”); however, the NIH announced that the RAC will only publicly review clinical trials if the trials cannot be evaluated by standard oversight bodies and pose unusual risks.

The same applies in the European Union. The EMA’s Committee for Advanced Therapies (“CAT”), is responsible for assessing the quality, safety and efficacy of advanced-therapy medicinal products. The role of CAT is to prepare a draft opinion on an application for marketing authorization for a gene therapy medicinal candidate that is submitted to the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (“CHMP”), before CHMP adopts its final opinion. In the European Union, the development and evaluation of a gene therapy medicinal product must be considered in the context of the relevant European Union guidelines. The EMA may issue new guidelines concerning the development and marketing authorization for gene therapy medicinal products and require that we comply with these new guidelines. As a result, the procedures and standards applied to gene therapy products and cell therapy products may be applied to any product candidates we may develop, but that remains uncertain at this point.

These regulatory review committees and advisory groups and the new guidelines they promulgate may lengthen the regulatory review process, require us to perform additional studies, increase our development costs, lead to changes in regulatory positions and interpretations, delay or prevent approval and commercialization of any product candidates we may develop or lead to significant post-approval limitations or restrictions. As we advance any product candidates we may develop, we will be required to consult with these regulatory and advisory groups and comply with applicable guidelines. If we fail to do so, we may be required to delay or discontinue development of these product candidates. Delay or failure to obtain, or unexpected costs in obtaining, the regulatory approval necessary to bring a potential product to market could decrease our ability to generate sufficient product revenue to maintain our business.

Although the FDA decides whether individual genetic medicine protocols may proceed, the RAC public review process, if undertaken, can delay the initiation of a clinical trial, even if the FDA has reviewed the trial

41

design and details and approved its initiation. Conversely, the FDA can put an IND on a clinical hold even if the RAC has provided a favorable review or an exemption from in-depth, public review. If we were to engage an NIH-funded institution to conduct a clinical trial, now or in the future, that institution’s institutional biosafety committee, as well as its IRB would need to review the proposed clinical trial to assess the safety of the trial. In addition, adverse developments in clinical trials of genetic medicine products conducted by others may cause the FDA or other oversight bodies to change the requirements for approval of any product candidates we may develop. Similarly, the EMA may issue new guidelines concerning the development and marketing authorization for genetic medicine products and require that we comply with these new guidelines.

As we are initially seeking to identify and develop product candidates to treat diseases using novel technologies, there is heightened risk that the FDA, the EMA or other regulatory authority may not consider the clinical trial endpoints that we propose to provide clinically meaningful results. Even if the endpoints are deemed clinically meaningful, we may not achieve these endpoints to a degree of statistical significance, particularly because many of the diseases we are targeting with our platform have small patient populations, making development of large and rigorous clinical trials more difficult.

Adverse developments in post-marketing experience or in clinical trials conducted by others of gene therapy products or cell therapy products may cause the FDA, the EMA, and other regulatory bodies to revise the requirements for development or approval of any product candidates we may develop or limit the use of products utilizing non-viral gene therapy technologies, either of which could materially harm our business. In addition, the clinical trial requirements of the FDA, the EMA, and other regulatory authorities and the criteria these regulators use to determine the safety and efficacy of a product candidate vary substantially according to the type, complexity, novelty and intended use and market of the potential products. The regulatory approval process for novel product candidates such as the product candidates we may develop can be more expensive and take longer than for other, better known or more extensively studied pharmaceutical or other product candidates. Regulatory agencies administering existing or future regulations or legislation may not allow production and marketing of products utilizing non-viral gene therapy technology in a timely manner or under technically or commercially feasible conditions. In addition, regulatory action or private litigation could result in expenses, delays or other impediments to our research programs or the commercialization of resulting products.

In addition, ethical, social and legal concerns about genetic medicine, genetic testing and genetic research could result in additional regulations or prohibiting the processes we may use. Federal and state agencies, congressional committees and non-U.S. governments have expressed their intentions to further regulate biotechnology. More restrictive regulations or claims that any product candidates we may develop are unsafe or pose a hazard could prevent us from commercializing any products. New government requirements may be established that could delay or prevent regulatory approval of any product candidates we may develop under development. It is impossible to predict whether legislative changes will be enacted, regulations, policies or guidance changed, or interpretations by agencies or courts changed, or what the impact of such changes, if any, may be.

As we advance any product candidates we may develop through clinical development, we will be required to consult with these regulatory and advisory groups and comply with applicable guidelines. These regulatory review committees and advisory groups and any new guidelines they promulgate may lengthen the regulatory review process, require us to perform additional studies, increase our development costs, lead to changes in regulatory positions and interpretations, delay or prevent approval and commercialization of any product candidates we may develop or lead to significant post-approval limitations or restrictions. Delay or failure to obtain, or unexpected costs in obtaining, the regulatory approval necessary to bring a potential product to market could decrease our ability to generate sufficient product revenue.

We have designed and are currently conducting the clinical trials for EG-70, our most advanced product candidate in accordance with the FDA’s 2018 Guidance Document entitled “Bacillus Calmette-Guérin-Unresponsive Nonmuscle Invasive Bladder Cancer: Developing Drugs and Biologics for Treatment Guidance for

42

Industry.” This document sets forth guidance for patient selection and describes a potentially abbreviated regulatory path for approval provided certain recruitment, efficacy, and safety data are met. The FDA may review, revoke, or otherwise modify these guidelines at any time, for any reason, which would have a material adverse effect on our approval timelines or process. Furthermore, approval of other competitive products treating the same indication may reduce the agency’s propensity to support abbreviated approval pathways, which could cause our programs to be delayed in achieving regulatory approval or contribute to our failure to achieve approval at all.

We cannot predict whether or when we will obtain regulatory approval to commercialize a product candidate we may develop in the United States or any other jurisdiction and any such approval may be for a narrower indication than we seek.

We cannot commercialize a product candidate until the appropriate regulatory authorities have reviewed and approved the product candidate and our application to commercialize it. Even if any product candidates we may develop meet their safety and efficacy endpoints in clinical trials, regulatory authorities may not complete their review processes in a timely manner or we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval. Additional delays may result if an FDA panel of experts (“Advisory Committee”) or other regulatory authority recommends non-approval or restrictions on approval. In addition, we may experience delays or rejections based upon additional government regulation from future legislation or administrative action or changes in regulatory authority policy during the period of product development, clinical trials and the review process.

Regulatory authorities also may approve a product candidate for more limited indications than requested or they may impose significant limitations in the form of narrow indications, warnings or a REMS. These regulatory authorities may require labeling that includes precautions, boxed warnings or contra-indications with respect to conditions of use, or they may grant approval subject to the performance of costly post-marketing clinical trials.

In addition, regulatory authorities may not approve the labeling claims that are necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of any product candidates we may develop. Any of the foregoing scenarios could materially harm the commercial prospects for any product candidates we may develop and materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

If we are not able to obtain or if there are delays in obtaining required regulatory approvals for our product candidates, we will not be able to commercialize or will be delayed in commercializing our product candidates and our ability to generate revenue will be adversely affected. Even if we eventually gain approval for any of our product candidates, we may be unable to commercialize them.

Our product candidates and the activities associated with their development and commercialization, including their design, testing, manufacture, safety, efficacy, recordkeeping, labeling, storage, approval, advertising, promotion, sale, distribution, import and export are subject to comprehensive regulation by the FDA and other regulatory agencies in the United States and by comparable authorities in other countries. Before we can commercialize any of our product candidates, we must obtain marketing approval. All of the product candidates that we are developing, or may develop in the future, require research and development, pre-clinical studies, nonclinical testing, and clinical trials prior to seeking regulatory approval, and commencing commercial sales. We have not 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. In certain instances, we may need to rely on third-party CROs and/or regulatory consultants to assist us in this process, and we may have limited control over those third parties and their conduct with respect to our development programs and product candidates. To date, we have focused substantially all of our efforts and financial resources on identifying and developing our product candidates, including conducting lead optimization, nonclinical studies, preclinical studies and clinical trials, and providing general and administrative support for these operations. Securing regulatory approval requires the submission of extensive preclinical and clinical data and supporting information to the various regulatory

43

authorities for each therapeutic indication to establish the biologic product candidate’s safety, purity, efficacy and potency. Securing regulatory approval also requires the submission of information about the manufacturing processes for the biologic product candidate to, and inspection of manufacturing facilities by, the relevant regulatory authority. Manufacturing facilities must comply with cGMP regulations, which include requirements relating to organization of personnel, buildings and facilities, equipment, control of components and drug product containers and closures, production and process controls, packaging and labeling controls, holding and distribution, laboratory controls, records and reports. In addition, given the novelty of our therapeutics approach and technologies, our product candidates 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 of such products if approved.

The process of obtaining regulatory approvals, both in the United States and abroad, 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. FDA and other regulatory bodies may continually change the requirements for Chemistry, Manufacturing and Controls (CMC) and other aspects of product manufacturing such that the approval to continue a clinical trial and/or commercially sell a product may never occur. 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 IND, BLA or equivalent application types, may cause delays in the approval or rejection of an application. The FDA and comparable authorities in other countries have substantial discretion in the approval process and may refuse to accept any application or may decide that our data are insufficient for approval and require additional preclinical, clinical or other studies. Our product candidates could be delayed in receiving or fail to receive regulatory approval for many reasons, including the following:

Of the large number of drugs and biologics in development, only a small percentage successfully complete the FDA or non-U.S. regulatory approval processes and are commercialized. The lengthy approval process as well as the unpredictability of clinical trial results may result in our failing to obtain regulatory approval to market our product candidates, which would significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

44

We expect the novel nature of our product candidates to create further challenges in obtaining regulatory approval. As a result, our ability to develop product candidates and obtain regulatory approval may be adversely affected.

For example, the general approach for FDA approval of a new biologic or drug is for sponsors to seek licensure or approval based on dispositive data from well-controlled, Phase 3 clinical trials of the relevant product candidate in the relevant patient population. Phase 3 clinical trials typically involve hundreds of patients, have significant costs and take years to complete. We believe that we may be able to utilize the requirements defined in the FDA’s guidance for industry on developing therapeutics for BCG-unresponsive high-risk NMIBC given the limited alternatives for treatments for cancer and other serious diseases, but the FDA may not agree with our plans or permit us to proceed under such alternative guidance.

The FDA may also require an Advisory Committee to deliberate on the adequacy of the safety and efficacy data to support BLA approval. The opinion of the Advisory Committee, although not binding, may have a significant impact on our ability to obtain approval of any product candidates that we develop based on the completed clinical trials.

Moreover, approval of genetic or biomarker diagnostic tests may be necessary in order to advance some of our product candidates to clinical trials or potential commercialization. In the future, regulatory agencies may require the development and approval of such tests. Accordingly, the regulatory approval pathway for such product candidates may be uncertain, complex, expensive and lengthy and approval may not be obtained.

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

If we experience delays in obtaining approval or if we fail to obtain approval of our product candidates, the commercial prospects for our product candidates may be harmed and our ability to generate revenues will be materially harmed.

We may not obtain or maintain regulatory approval in all jurisdictions in which such approval may be required. Obtaining and maintaining regulatory approval of our product candidates in one jurisdiction does not mean that we will obtain and/or maintain regulatory approval of our product candidates in other jurisdictions, while a failure or delay in obtaining or maintaining regulatory approval of our product candidates in one jurisdiction may have a material adverse effect on the regulatory approval or maintenance process in other jurisdictions.

Obtaining and maintaining regulatory approval of our product candidates in one jurisdiction does not guarantee that we will be able to obtain or maintain regulatory approval in any other jurisdiction, while a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one jurisdiction may have a negative effect on the regulatory approval process in others. For example, even if the FDA grants marketing approval of a product candidate, comparable regulatory authorities in non-U.S. jurisdictions must also approve the manufacturing, marketing and promotion of the product candidate in those countries. Approval procedures vary among jurisdictions and can involve requirements and administrative review periods different from, and greater than, those in the United States, including additional preclinical studies or clinical trials, as clinical trials conducted in one jurisdiction may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions. In many non-U.S. jurisdictions, a product candidate must be approved for reimbursement before it can be approved for sale in that jurisdiction. In some cases, the price that we intend to charge for our products is also subject to approval.

45

We may also submit marketing applications in other countries. Regulatory authorities in jurisdictions outside of the United States have requirements for approval of product candidates with which we must comply prior to marketing in those jurisdictions and such regulatory requirements can vary widely from country to country. Obtaining other regulatory approvals and compliance with other regulatory requirements could result in significant delays, difficulties and costs for us and could require additional preclinical studies or clinical trials, which could be costly and time-consuming and could delay or prevent the introduction of our products in certain countries. The non-U.S. regulatory approval process involves 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 fail to comply with the regulatory requirements in international markets and/or obtain and maintain applicable marketing approvals, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of our product candidates will be harmed.

We may seek priority review designation for one or more of our product candidates, but we might not receive such designation, and even if we do, such designation may not lead to a faster regulatory review or approval process.

If the FDA determines that a product candidate offers a treatment for a serious condition and, if approved, the product would provide a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness of the treatment, the FDA may designate the marketing application for that product candidate for priority review. A priority review designation is intended to direct overall attention and resources to the evaluation of such applications and to shorten the goal for the FDA to review an application to six months, rather than the standard review period of ten months. We may request priority review for one or more original BLAs for our product candidates in the future. The FDA has broad discretion with respect to whether or not to grant priority review status to a marketing application, so even if we believe an application for a particular product candidate is eligible for such designation or status, the FDA may decide not to grant it. Moreover, a priority review designation does not necessarily result in expedited regulatory review or approval process or necessarily confer any advantage with respect to approval compared to conventional FDA procedures. Receiving priority review from the FDA does not guarantee approval within the six-month review cycle, or at all.

Even if we receive regulatory approval of any product candidates or therapies, we will be subject to ongoing regulatory obligations, reporting requirements and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expenses. If we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or experience unanticipated problems with our product candidates, we may be subject to substantial penalties, fines, delays, suspensions, refusals and withdrawals of approvals.

If any of our product candidates are approved, they will be subject to ongoing regulatory requirements and reporting requirements for manufacturing, labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion, sampling, recordkeeping, 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 non-U.S. regulatory authorities. In addition, we will be subject to continued compliance with cGMP and Good Clinical Practice (“GCP”) requirements for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval.

Facilities of CMOs and testing laboratories are required to comply with extensive FDA, and non-U.S. regulatory authority requirements, including ensuring that quality control and manufacturing procedures conform to cGMP, and in certain cases, current Good Tissue Practices (“cGTP”), regulations. As a result, 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 BLA, other marketing application, and previous responses to inspection observations. Accordingly, we and others with whom we work with must continue to expend time, money and effort in all areas of regulatory compliance, including manufacturing, production and quality control.

Any regulatory approvals that we receive for our product candidates may be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval or contain

46

requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing, including Phase 4 clinical trials and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate. The FDA may also require that we implement a REMS program as a condition of approval of our product candidates, which could entail requirements for long-term patient follow-up, a medication guide, physician communication plans or additional elements to ensure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. In addition, if the FDA or a comparable non-U.S. regulatory authority approves our product candidates, we will have to comply with requirements including submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports and establishment registration.

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

The FDA strictly regulates marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of products that are placed on the market. Products may be promoted only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off-label uses may be subject to significant liability. The policies of the FDA and of other regulatory authorities may change and additional government regulations maybe enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. 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.

Changes in regulatory requirements could result in delays or discontinuation of development of our product candidates or therapies, or unexpected costs in obtaining or maintaining regulatory approval, and thereby adversely affect our business and results of operations.

Government authorities in the United States at the federal, state and local level and in other countries regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, approval, labeling, packaging, storage, recordkeeping, promotion, advertising, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, marketing and export and import of drug and biological products. Generally, before a new drug or biologic can be marketed, considerable data demonstrating its quality, safety and efficacy and durability of effect must be obtained, organized into a format specific for each regulatory authority, submitted for review and approved by the regulatory authority.

Because we are developing novel gene therapy product candidates, the regulatory requirements that we will be subject to are continually evolving and may not be clear. Even with respect to more established products that

47

fit into the category of gene therapies, the regulatory landscape is still developing. For example, regulatory requirements governing gene therapy products have changed frequently and may continue to change in the future. Moreover, there is substantial, and sometimes uncoordinated, overlap in those responsible for regulation of existing cell therapy products.

Complex regulatory environments exist in other jurisdictions in which we might consider seeking regulatory approvals for our product candidates, further complicating the regulatory landscape. For example, in the European Union a special committee called the CAT was established within the EMA in accordance with Regulation (“EC”) No 1394/2007 on advanced-therapy medicinal products (“ATMPs”) to assess the quality, safety and efficacy of ATMPs, and to follow scientific developments in the field. ATMPs include gene therapy products. These various regulatory review committees and advisory groups and new or revised guidelines that they promulgate from time to time may lengthen the regulatory review process, require us to perform additional studies, increase our development costs, lead to changes in regulatory positions and interpretations, delay or prevent approval and commercialization of our product candidates or lead to significant post-approval limitations or restrictions. Because the regulatory landscape for our gene therapies and product candidates is new, we may face even more cumbersome and complex regulations than those emerging for cell therapy products.

Furthermore, even if our product candidates obtain required regulatory approvals, such approvals may later be withdrawn as a result of changes in regulations or the interpretation of regulations by applicable regulatory agencies.

Delay or failure to obtain, or unexpected costs in obtaining, the regulatory approval necessary to bring a potential product to market could decrease our ability to generate sufficient product revenue to maintain our business.

Our contract manufacturers are subject to significant regulation with respect to the manufacturing of our current and future product candidates. The manufacturing facilities on which we rely may not meet or continue to meet regulatory requirements and/or may have limited capacity.

Contract manufacturers and their facilities are required to comply with extensive regulatory requirements, including ensuring that quality control and manufacturing procedures conform to cGMP requirements. These regulations cover all aspects of manufacturing relating to our product candidates and components used in clinical studies and commercial production. These regulations govern manufacturing processes and procedures (including record keeping) and the implementation and operation of quality systems to control and assure the quality of investigational product candidates and products approved for sale. Poor control of production processes can lead to the introduction of contaminants or to inadvertent changes in the properties or stability of our product candidates that may not be detectable in final product testing. We and our contract manufacturers must supply all necessary documentation in support of a BLA or Market Authorization Application (“MAA”) on a timely basis and must adhere to Good Laboratory Practices (“GLP”) and cGMP regulations enforced by the FDA and other regulatory authorities through their facilities inspection program. The facilities and quality systems of our third-party contractors must pass a pre-approval inspection for compliance with the applicable regulations as a condition of regulatory approval of our product candidates or any of our other potential product candidates.

In addition, the regulatory authorities may, at any time, audit or inspect a manufacturing facility involved with the preparation of our product candidates or our other potential product candidates or the associated quality systems for compliance with the regulations applicable to the activities being conducted. We do not control the manufacturing process of, and are completely dependent on, our contract manufacturing partners for compliance with the regulatory requirements. If these facilities do not pass a pre-approval plant inspection, regulatory approval of the product candidates may not be granted or may be substantially delayed until any violations are corrected to the satisfaction of the regulatory authority, if ever. Moreover, if our contract manufacturers fail to achieve and maintain high manufacturing standards, in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements, or there are substantial manufacturing errors, this could result in patient injury or death, product shortages, product recalls or withdrawals, delays or failures in product testing or delivery, cost overruns, revocation of regulatory approvals, or other problems that could seriously harm our business.

48

Ongoing healthcare legislative and regulatory reform measures, including the U.S. federal government’s determination that any of our product candidates is an “essential” biologic medicine, may have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

The United States and many non-U.S. jurisdictions have enacted or proposed legislative and regulatory changes affecting the healthcare system, including implementing cost-containment programs to limit the growth of government-paid healthcare costs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products for branded prescription products. In recent years, Congress has considered reductions in Medicare reimbursement levels for products administered by physicians. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”), the agency that administers the Medicare and Medicaid programs, also has authority to revise reimbursement rates and to implement coverage restrictions for some products. Cost reduction initiatives and changes in coverage implemented through legislation or regulation could decrease utilization of and reimbursement for any approved products. While Medicare regulations apply only to drug benefits for Medicare beneficiaries, private payers often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement rates. Therefore, any reduction in reimbursement that results from federal legislation or regulation may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payers.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act (as amended, the “ACA”) substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers, and significantly impacts the pharmaceutical industry. The ACA is intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against healthcare fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers, and impose additional health policy reforms. Among other things, the ACA expanded manufacturers’ rebate liability under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program by increasing the minimum Medicaid rebate for both branded and generic products, expanded the 340B program, and revised the definition of average manufacturer price, which could increase the amount of Medicaid rebates manufacturers are required to pay to states. The legislation also extended Medicaid rebates, previously due only on fee-for-service Medicaid utilization, to include the utilization of Medicaid managed care organizations as well and created an alternative rebate formula for certain new formulations of certain existing products that is intended to increase the amount of rebates due on those products. On February 1, 2016, CMS issued final regulations to implement the changes to the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program under the ACA. These regulations became effective on April 1, 2016. Since that time, there have been significant ongoing efforts to modify or eliminate the ACA. The Tax Act, enacted on December 22, 2017, repealed the shared responsibility payment for individuals who fail to maintain minimum essential coverage under section 5000A of the United States Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”) or the individual mandate.

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the passage of the ACA. The Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, created the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (the “Joint Select Committee”), to provide recommendations and legislative language that would significantly improve the short-term and long-term fiscal imbalance of the U.S. federal government. The Joint Select Committee did not achieve its targeted deficit reduction of an amount greater than $1.2 trillion for the fiscal years 2012 through 2021, triggering the legislation’s automatic reductions to several government programs. These reductions included aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to healthcare providers of up to 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect in April 2013 and will remain in effect through 2031, with the exception of a temporary suspension implemented under various COVID-19 relief legislation from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2022. Under the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, the 2% Medicare sequester is extended for the first six months of fiscal year 2032 and revises the sequester percentage up to 2% for fiscal years 2030 and 2031. These across-the-board spending cuts could adversely affect our future revenues, earnings, and cash flows.

In August 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (the “IRA”). The IRA contains substantial drug pricing reforms, including the establishment of a drug price negotiation program within the U.S.

49

Department of Health and Human Services that would require manufacturers to charge a negotiated “maximum fair price” for certain selected drugs or pay an excise tax for noncompliance, the establishment of rebate payment requirements on manufacturers of certain drugs payable under Medicare Parts B and D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation, and requires manufacturers to provide discounts on Part D drugs. Substantial penalties can be assessed for noncompliance with the drug pricing provisions in the IRA. The IRA could have the effect of reducing the prices we can charge and reimbursement we receive for our products, if approved, thereby reducing our profitability, and could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. The effect of the IRA on our business and the pharmaceutical industry in general is not yet known.

The ACA, has also been subject to challenges in the courts. On December 14, 2018, a Texas U.S. District Court Judge ruled that the ACA is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress. On December 18, 2019, the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held that the individual mandate is unconstitutional and remanded the case to the Texas District Court to reconsider its earlier invalidation of the entire ACA. An appeal was taken to the U.S. Supreme Court. On June 17, 2021, the Supreme Court ruled that the plaintiffs lacked standing to challenge the law as they had not alleged personal injury traceable to the allegedly unlawful conduct. As a result, the Supreme Court did not rule on the constitutionality of the ACA or any of its provisions.

Further changes to and under the ACA remain possible but it is unknown what form any such changes or any law proposed to replace or revise the ACA would take, and how or whether it may affect our business in the future. We expect that changes to the ACA, the Medicare and Medicaid programs and changes stemming from other healthcare reform measures, especially with regard to healthcare access, financing or other legislation in individual states, could have a material adverse effect on the healthcare industry.

At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.

We expect that additional federal, state and non-U.S. healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in limited coverage and reimbursement and reduced demand for our products, once approved, or additional pricing pressures.

Any product candidates we develop may become subject to unfavorable or unprofitable third-party coverage and reimbursement practices, as well as pricing regulations.

Patients rely on insurance coverage by third-party payors (third-party payors include Medicare and Medicaid (government payors) and commercial insurance companies such as Blue Cross Blue Shield, Humana, Cigna, etc.), to pay for products. The availability and extent of coverage and adequate reimbursement by third-party payors, including government health administration authorities, private health coverage insurers, managed care organizations and other third-party payors is essential for most patients to be able to afford expensive treatments. Sales of any of our product candidates that receive marketing approval will depend substantially, both in the United States and internationally, on the extent to which the costs of such product candidates will be covered and reimbursed by third-party payors.

Private insurance companies, commercial payors and various other healthcare intermediaries such as pharmacy benefit managers may take steps to thwart physician and/or patient access to our products including not covering the product, blocking access to our products or adding step edits or prior approval requirements before reimbursing patients or health care providers for using our products. This could result in reduced or failure to achieve revenues and/or margins. In addition, third-party organizations that purport to study and issue reports

50

regarding the pricing of certain therapeutic medicines may issue reports regarding our products that negatively affect pricing and our product use and uptake by physicians and patients. Additionally, private insurance companies are increasingly imposing utilization management tools, such as requiring prior authorization for a proprietary product if a generic product or less expensive product is available or requiring the patient to first fail on one or more generic or less expensive products before permitting access to a proprietary medicine.

There is significant uncertainty related to third-party payor coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products. Factors payors consider in determining reimbursement are based on whether the product is: (i) a covered benefit under its health plan; (ii) safe, effective and medically necessary; (iii) appropriate for the specific patient; (iv) cost-effective; and (v) neither experimental nor investigational. This process will require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our products to each third-party payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be applied consistently or obtained in the first instance.

No uniform policy exists for coverage and reimbursement in the United States. If reimbursement is not available, or is available only to limited levels, we 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 us to establish or maintain pricing sufficient to realize an adequate return on our investment. Coverage and reimbursement may impact the demand for, or the price of, any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval. If coverage and reimbursement are not available or reimbursement is available only to limited levels, we may not successfully commercialize any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval.

As U.S. federal and state governments implement additional health care cost containment measures, including measures to lower prescription drug pricing, we cannot be sure that our products, if approved, will be covered by private or public payors, and if covered, whether the reimbursement will be adequate or competitive with other marketed products. Such other actions by federal and state governments and health plans may put additional downward pressure on pharmaceutical pricing and health care costs, which could negatively impact coverage and reimbursement for our products if approved, our revenue, and our ability to compete with other marketed products and to recoup the costs of our research and development. Outside the United States, the commercialization of therapeutics is generally subject to extensive governmental price controls and other market regulations, and we believe the increasing emphasis on cost containment initiatives in the European Union, the United Kingdom, Japan and other countries has and will continue to put pressure on the pricing and usage of therapeutics such as our product candidates.

If we are unable to establish or sustain coverage and adequate reimbursement for any product candidates from third-party payors, the adoption of those products and sales revenue will be adversely affected, which, in turn, could adversely affect the ability to market or sell those product candidates, if approved. Coverage policies and third-party payor reimbursement rates may change at any time. Even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for one or more products for which we receive regulatory approval, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future or subject to recoupment or overpayment challenges.

Drug marketing, price controls and reimbursement regulations may materially affect our ability to market and receive coverage for our product candidates, if approved, in the European Union, the United Kingdom, Japan and other non-U.S. jurisdictions.

We intend to seek approval to market our product candidates in both the United States and in selected non-U.S. jurisdictions. If we obtain approval in one or more non-U.S. jurisdictions for our product candidates, we will be subject to rules and regulations in those jurisdictions. In some countries outside of the United States, particularly those in the European Union, the pricing of pharmaceutical products is subject to governmental control and other market regulations, which could put pressure on the pricing and usage of our product candidates. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after obtaining marketing approval of a product candidate. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval in some

51

countries, we may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of our product candidate to other available therapies. If required to execute such a trial, we cannot be sure of a favorable outcome. In general, product prices under such systems are substantially lower than in the United States. Price controls in non-U.S. jurisdictions or changes in pricing regulations in such jurisdictions could reduce the amount we are able to charge for our product candidates. In addition, market acceptance and sales of our product candidates will depend significantly on the availability of adequate coverage and reimbursement from third-party payors for our product candidates and may be affected by existing and future healthcare reform measures.

Much like the federal Anti-Kickback Statute (“AKS”) prohibition in the United States, the provision of benefits or advantages to physicians to induce or encourage the prescription, recommendation, endorsement, purchase, supply, order or use of medicinal products are also prohibited in the European Union. The provision of benefits or advantages to physicians is governed by the national anti-bribery laws of EU member states, such as the UK Bribery Act 2010. Infringement of these laws could result in substantial fines and imprisonment.

Payments made to physicians in certain EU 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, their competent professional organization and/or the regulatory authorities of the individual EU member states. These requirements are provided in the national laws, industry codes or professional codes of conduct, applicable in the EU member states. Failure to comply with these requirements could result in reputational risk, public reprimands, administrative penalties, fines or imprisonment.

In addition, in most countries outside of the United States, including the European Economic Area (“EEA”), 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 EU 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 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. 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 and the potential profitability of any of our product candidates in those countries would be negatively affected.

Guidelines and recommendations published by various organizations may impact the use or reimbursement of EG-70, if approved, as well as other future products.

Government authorities promulgate regulations and guidelines that may be directly applicable to us and any approved products. However, professional societies, practice management groups, insurance carriers, physicians’ groups, private health and science foundations and organizations involved in various diseases also publish guidelines and recommendations to healthcare providers, administrators and payors, as well as patient communities.

Recommendations by government authorities or other groups and organizations may relate to such matters as usage, dosage, route of administration and use of related therapies, and a growing number of organizations are

52

providing assessments of the value and pricing of pharmaceutical products. These assessments may come from private organizations, such as the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (“ICER”), which publish their findings and offer recommendations relating to the products’ reimbursement by government and private payors. On December 17, 2020, ICER published its final report assessing the effectiveness and value of nadofaragene firadenovec and oportuzumab monatox for BCG-unresponsive NMIBC, both of which are potential competitors to EG-70. The guidance was updated on January 15, 2021. Nadofargene firadenovec, sold under the brand name Adstiladrin, is a FDA-approved gene therapy approved in 2022 for the treatment of adult patients with high-risk BCG-unresponsive NMIBC with Cis with or without papillary tumors; oportuzumab monatox, also known as Vicineum, is an experimental therapy that has been studied in a highly similar patient group. The findings of this or any future ICER report or similar recommendations or guidelines from ICER or similar third parties may affect our reputation as well as the perception of our value, and any recommendations or guidelines that result in decreased use or reimbursement of EG-70, if approved or adopted into commercial or clinical practice, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In addition, the occurrence of any of the foregoing, or the perception by the investment community or shareholders that such recommendations or guidelines will result in decreased use or reimbursement of EG-70, if approved, could adversely affect the market price of our securities. The effect, if any, of any ICER report, recommendations or guidelines on our any of our products relating to usage, dosage, administration, pricing, reimbursement or other matters is not foreseeable and we make no assurance regarding the effect of any current or future ICER report, recommendations or guidelines on our business.

We are subject to stringent privacy laws, information security laws, regulations, policies and contractual obligations related to data privacy and security and changes in such laws, regulations, policies and contractual obligations could adversely affect our business and results of operations.

We are subject to data privacy and protection laws, rules and regulations, as well as contractual obligations, that apply to the collection, transmission, storage, use and other processing of personally-identifying information, which among other things, impose certain requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of personal information, including comprehensive regulatory systems in the United States, European Union and United Kingdom. The legislative and regulatory landscape for privacy and data protection continues to evolve in jurisdictions worldwide, and there has been an increasing focus on privacy and data protection issues with the potential to affect our business. Failure to comply with any of these laws and regulations could result in enforcement action against us, including fines, imprisonment of company officials and public censure, claims for damages by affected individuals, damage to our reputation and loss of goodwill, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

There are numerous U.S. federal and state laws, rules and regulations governing the collection, sharing, use, retention, disclosure, security, transfer, storage and other processing of personal information, including federal and state data privacy and security laws, data breach notification laws, and data disposal laws. In particular, at the federal level, regulations promulgated pursuant to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (“HIPAA”) establish privacy and security standards that limit the use and disclosure of individually identifiable health information, or protected health information, and require the implementation of administrative, physical and technological safeguards to protect the privacy of protected health information and ensure the confidentiality, integrity and availability of electronic protected health information. Determining whether protected health information has been handled in compliance with applicable privacy standards and our contractual obligations can be complex and may be subject to changing interpretation. These obligations may be applicable to some or all of our business activities now or in the future. At the federal level, we are also subject to, among other laws and regulations, the rules and regulations promulgated under the authority of the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) (which has the authority to regulate and enforce against unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, including acts and practices with respect to data privacy and security), as well as the Electronic Communication Privacy Act. The United States Congress also has considered, is currently considering, and may in the future consider, various proposals for comprehensive federal data privacy and security legislation, to which we may become subject if passed. If we are unable to properly protect the privacy

53

and security of protected health information, we could be found to have breached certain contracts or obligations. Further, if we fail to comply with applicable privacy laws, including applicable HIPAA privacy and security standards, we could face civil and criminal penalties. HHS enforcement activity can result in financial liability and reputational harm, and responses to such enforcement activity can consume significant internal resources. 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. We cannot be sure how these regulations will be interpreted, enforced or applied to our operations. In addition to the risks associated with enforcement activities and potential contractual liabilities, our ongoing efforts to comply with evolving laws and regulations at the federal and state level may be costly and require ongoing modifications to our policies, procedures and systems.

At the state level, we are subject to similar and sometimes more onerous data protection and privacy laws and regulations such as the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act (the “CPRA”) (collectively, the “CCPA”). The CCPA imposes many requirements on certain businesses that process the personal information of California residents, including requirements similar to those found in the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”). For example, the CCPA requires covered businesses to provide notice to California residents regarding the information collected about them and how such information is used and shared, provides California residents the right to request access to such personal information and, in certain cases, request the erasure of such personal information. The CCPA also affords California residents the right to opt-out of certain “sales” of their personal information. The CCPA provides for significant civil penalties and statutory damages for companies that violate its requirements, and also provides for a private right of action for certain data breaches that result in the loss of unencrypted personal information. This private right of action is expected to increase the likelihood of, and risks associated with, data breach litigation. The CPRA significantly expands the CCPA to incorporate additional GDPR-like provisions including requiring that the use, retention, and sharing of personal information of California residents be reasonably necessary and proportionate to the purposes of collection or processing, granting additional protections for sensitive personal information, and requiring greater disclosures related to notice to residents regarding retention of information. These provisions may apply to some of our business activities. In addition, other states, including Virginia and Colorado, already have passed comprehensive state-level data privacy and security laws, rules and regulations that share similarities with the CCPA. Other states are in the process of enacting or will be considering these laws in the future. Moreover, laws in all 50 U.S. states require businesses to provide notice under certain circumstances to consumers whose personal information has been disclosed as a result of a data breach. These laws, and other similar laws that may be enacted in the future, may impact our business activities, including our identification of research subjects and ultimately the marketing and distribution of our products.

Similar to the laws in the United States, there are significant privacy and data security laws that apply in Europe and other countries. The collection, use, disclosure, transfer, or other processing of personal data, including personal health data, regarding individuals who are located in the EEA, and the processing of personal data that takes place in the EEA is regulated by the GDPR, which went into effect in May 2018 and imposes obligations on companies that operate in our industry with respect to the processing of personal data and the cross-border transfer of such data. The GDPR imposes onerous accountability obligations, including requiring data controllers and processors to maintain a record of their data processing and policies. Following the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union, the United Kingdom’s Data Protection Act 2018 (the “U.K. GDPR”), which “implements” and complements the GDPR and achieved formal approval by United Kingdom’s monarchy on May 23, 2018, applies to the processing of personal data that takes place in the United Kingdom and includes parallel obligations to those set forth by GDPR. While the GDPR and U.K. GDPR remain substantially similar for the time being, the U.K. government has announced that it would seek to chart its own path on data protection and reform its relevant laws, including in ways that may differ from the GDPR. While these developments increase uncertainty with regard to data protection regulation in the United Kingdom, even in their current, substantially similar form, the GDPR and U.K. GDPR can expose businesses to divergent parallel regimes that may be subject to potentially different interpretations and enforcement actions for certain violations and related uncertainty. If our or our service providers’ privacy or data security measures fail to comply with the

54

GDPR and U.K. GDPR requirements, we may be subject to litigation, regulatory investigations, enforcement notices requiring us to change the way we use personal data and/or fines of up to 20 million Euros (or GBP17.5 million under the U.K. GDPR) or up to 4% of the total worldwide annual turnover of the preceding financial year, whichever is higher, as well as compensation claims by affected individuals, negative publicity, reputational harm and a potential loss of business and goodwill.

The GDPR places restrictions on the cross-border transfer of personal data from the EEA to countries that have not been found by the European Commission to offer adequate data protection legislation, such as the United States. There are ongoing concerns about the ability of companies to transfer personal data from the EEA to other countries. Similar complexities and uncertainties also apply to transfers from the U.K. to third countries. In July 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”), invalidated the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield, one of the mechanisms used to legitimize the transfer of personal data from the EEA to the United States. The CJEU’s decision also drew into question the long-term viability of an alternative means of data transfer, the standard contractual clauses (“SCCs”), for transfers of personal data from the EEA to the United States. While we were not self-certified under the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield, this CJEU decision may lead to increased scrutiny on data transfers from the EEA to the United States generally and increase our costs of compliance with data privacy legislation as well as our costs of negotiating appropriate privacy and security agreements with our vendors. While we may take steps to mitigate the impact on us, such as implementing SCCs, the efficacy and longevity of these mechanisms remains uncertain. Moreover, in 2021, the European Commission adopted new SCCs, which impose on companies additional obligations relating to personal data transfers out of the EEA, including the obligation to update internal privacy practices, conduct transfer impact assessments and, as required, implement additional security measures. The new SCCs may increase the legal risks and liabilities under European Union laws associated with cross-border data transfers, and result in material increased compliance and operational costs. While the European Commission announced in March 2022 that an agreement in principle had been reached between European Union and U.S. authorities regarding a new transatlantic data privacy framework, no formal agreement has been finalized, and any such agreement, if formalized, is likely to face challenge at the CJEU. Moreover, while the U.K. GDPR is now effective in the United Kingdom, it is still unclear whether transfer of data from the EEA to the United Kingdom will remain lawful under the GDPR. The United Kingdom has already determined that it considers all European Union and EEA member states to be adequate for the purposes of data protection, ensuring that data flows from the United Kingdom to the European Union and EEA remain unaffected. In addition, a decision from the European Commission appears to deem the United Kingdom as being “essentially adequate” for purposes of data transfer from the EEA to the United Kingdom, such that SCCs are not required for the transfer of personal data from the EEA to the United Kingdom, although such decision will sunset in June 2025 unless extended and it may be revoked in the future by the European Commission if the United Kingdom data protection regime is reformed in ways that deviate substantially from the GDPR. Adding further complexity for international data flows, in March 2022, the United Kingdom adopted its own International Data Transfer Agreement for transfers of personal data out of the United Kingdom to so-called third countries, as well as an international data transfer addendum that can be used with the SCCs for the same purpose. The European Union has also proposed legislation that would regulate non-personal data and establish new cybersecurity standards, and other countries, including the United Kingdom, may similarly do so in the future. If we are otherwise unable to transfer data, including personal data, between and among countries and regions in which we operate, it could affect the manner in which we provide our services, the geographical location or segregation of our relevant systems and operations, and could adversely affect our financial results.

Beyond the GDPR and U.K. GDPR, there are privacy and data security laws in a growing number of countries around the world. While many loosely follow the GDPR as a model, other laws contain different or conflicting provisions. These laws will impact our ability to conduct our business activities, including both our clinical trials and any eventual sale and distribution of commercial products, through increased compliance costs, costs associated with contracting and potential enforcement actions.

While we continue to address the implications of the recent changes to data privacy regulations, data privacy remains an evolving landscape at both the domestic and international level, with new regulations coming into effect

55

and continued legal challenges, and our efforts to comply with the evolving data protection rules may be unsuccessful. It is possible that these laws may be interpreted and applied in a manner that is inconsistent with our practices. We must devote significant resources to understanding and complying with this changing landscape. Any failure, actual or perceived, to comply with laws regarding data protection would expose us to risk of enforcement actions taken by data protection authorities in the EEA and elsewhere and carries with it the potential for significant penalties if we are found to be non-compliant. Similarly, any failure, actual or perceived, to comply with federal and state laws in the United States regarding privacy and security of personal information could expose us to penalties under such laws. Any such failure to comply with data protection and privacy laws could result in government-imposed fines or orders requiring that we change our practices, claims for damages or other liabilities, regulatory investigations and enforcement action, litigation and significant costs for remediation, any of which could adversely affect our business. Even if we are not determined to have violated these laws, government investigations into these issues typically require the expenditure of significant resources and generate negative publicity, which could harm our reputation and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Cyber-attacks or other failures in our or our third-party vendors’, contractors’ or consultants’ telecommunications or information technology systems could result in information theft, data corruption and significant disruption of our business operations.

We, our programs, our CROs, third-party logistics providers, distributors and other contractors and consultants utilize information technology (“IT”), systems and networks to process, transmit and store electronic information, including but not limited to intellectual property, proprietary business information and personal information, in connection with our business activities. Our internal IT systems and those of current and future third parties on which we rely may fail and are vulnerable to breakdown, breach, interruption or damage from cyber incidents, employee error or malfeasance, theft or misuse, sophisticated nation-state and nation-state-supported actors, unauthorized access, natural disasters, terrorism, war, telecommunication and electrical failures or other compromises. As use of digital technologies has increased, cyber incidents, including third parties gaining access to employee accounts using stolen or inferred credentials, computer malware (e.g., ransomware), viruses, spamming, phishing attacks, denial-of-service attacks or other means, and deliberate attacks and attempts to gain unauthorized access to computer systems and networks, have increased in frequency, intensity, and sophistication. These threats pose a risk to the security of our, our programs’, our CROs’, third-party logistics providers’, distributors’ and other contractors’ and consultants’ systems and networks, and the confidentiality, availability and integrity of our intellectual property, confidential information, preclinical and clinical trial data, proprietary business information, personal data, and health-related information. There can be no assurance that we or any of our third-party partners will be successful in preventing cyberattacks or successfully mitigating their effects.

Advances in computer and software capabilities, encryption technology, and other discoveries increase the complexity of our technological environment, including how each interacts with our various software platforms. Such advances could delay or hinder our ability to conduct business or could compromise the integrity of our data, resulting in a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations. The risk of system disruption is increased when significant system changes are undertaken. If we fail to timely integrate and update our information technology systems and processes, we may fail to realize the cost savings or operational benefits anticipated to be derived from these initiatives. We also may experience occasional system interruptions and delays that make our information technology systems unavailable or slow to respond, including the interaction of our information technology systems with those of third parties. A lack of sophistication or reliability of our information technology systems could adversely impact our operations and consumer service and could require major repairs, replacements or remodelings, resulting in significant costs.

The risk of a security breach or disruption, particularly through cyberattacks or cyber intrusion, including by computer hackers, non-U.S. governments, and cyber terrorists, has generally increased as the number, intensity, and sophistication of attempted attacks and intrusions from around the world have increased. In addition, in response to the changes in workforce habits driven by the COVID-19 pandemic, varying parts of our workforce are currently working remotely on a part or full time basis. This could increase our cyber security risk, create data accessibility

56

concerns, and make us more susceptible to communication disruptions. We may not be able to anticipate all types of security threats, and we may not be able to implement preventive measures effective against all such security threats. The techniques used by cyber criminals change frequently, may not be recognized until launched, and can originate from a wide variety of sources, including outside groups such as external service providers, organized crime affiliates, terrorist organizations or hostile non-U.S. governments or agencies. We may also experience security incidents that may remain undetected for an extended period. Even if identified, we may be unable to adequately investigate or remediate incidents or breaches due to attackers increasingly using tools and techniques that are designed to circumvent controls, to avoid detection, and to remove or obfuscate forensic evidence. Similarly, there can be no assurance that our CROs, third-party logistics providers, distributors and other contractors, consultants and third parties will be successful in protecting our clinical and other data that is stored on their systems. Any loss of clinical trial data from our completed or ongoing clinical trials for any of our product candidates could result in delays in our development and regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. We and certain of our service providers are from time to time subject to cyberattacks and security incidents. We have experienced and expect to continue to experience actual and attempted cyberattacks of our IT networks, such as through phishing scams and ransomware. Although we do not believe that we have experienced any significant system failure, accident or security incidents to date, we cannot guarantee that we will not experience such incidents in the future.

Any cyberattack that leads to unauthorized access, use, or disclosure of personal information, including personal information regarding clinical trial participants or employees, data breach or destruction or loss of data could result in a violation of applicable U.S. and international privacy, data protection and other laws and regulations, require us to notify affected individuals or supervisory authorities, subject us to litigation and governmental investigations, proceedings and regulatory actions by federal, state and local regulatory entities in the United States and by international regulatory entities, cause our exposure to material civil and/or criminal liability and cause us to breach our contractual obligations, which could result in significant legal and financial exposure and reputational damages. Further, we could be forced to expend significant financial and operational resources in response to a security breach, including repairing system damage, increasing security protection costs by deploying additional personnel and modifying or enhancing our protection technologies, investigating and remediating any information security vulnerabilities and defending against and resolving legal and regulatory claims, all of which could divert resources and the attention of our management and key personnel away from our business operations and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. As cyber threats continue to evolve, we may be required to incur significant additional expenses in order to implement further data protection measures or to remediate any information security vulnerability. Further, we do not maintain separate cyber liability insurance and our general liability insurance and corporate risk program may not cover all potential claims to which we are exposed and may not be adequate to indemnify us for all liability.

There can be no assurance that the limitations of liability in our contracts would be enforceable or adequate or would otherwise protect us from liabilities or damages as a result of the events referenced above. We also cannot be certain that our existing insurance coverage will continue to be available on acceptable terms or in amounts sufficient to cover the potentially significant losses that may result from a security incident or breach or that the insurer will not deny coverage of any future claim. Accordingly, if our cybersecurity measures, and those of our service providers, fail to protect against unauthorized access, attacks and the mishandling of data by our employees and third-party service providers, then our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be adversely affected.

Our employees, independent contractors and contract manufacturers, consultants, commercial partners and vendors may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements.

We are exposed to the risk of fraud or other illegal activity by our employees, independent contractors, consultants, commercial partners and vendors. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless and/or negligent conduct that fails to comply with the laws enforced by the FDA and other regulatory bodies in

57

non-U.S. jurisdictions, provide true, complete and accurate information to the FDA and other similar regulatory bodies in non-U.S. jurisdictions, comply with manufacturing standards we have established, comply with healthcare fraud and abuse laws in the United States and similar non-U.S. laws, or report financial information or data accurately or to disclose unauthorized activities to us. If we obtain FDA approval of any of our product candidates and begin commercializing those products in the United States, our potential exposure under these laws will increase significantly and our costs associated with compliance with these laws are also likely to increase. These laws may impact, among other things, our current activities with principal investigators and research patients, as well as proposed and future sales, marketing and education programs.

Our relationships with healthcare providers and physicians and third-party payors are subject to applicable anti-kickback, fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations, which could expose us to criminal sanctions, civil penalties, contractual damages, reputational harm and result in diminished profits and future earnings and thereby adversely affect our business and results of operations.

We are subject to applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations, including, without limitation, the AKS and the False Claims Act (“FCA”), which may constrain our business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we sell, market and distribute our products. In particular, the promotion, sales and marketing of healthcare items and services, as well as certain business arrangements in the healthcare industry (e.g., healthcare providers, physicians and third-party payors), are subject to extensive laws designed to prevent fraud, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, structuring and commission(s), certain customer incentive programs and other business arrangements generally. We also may be subject to patient information and privacy and security regulation by both the federal government and the states and non-U.S. jurisdictions in which we conduct our business. The applicable federal, state and non-U.S. healthcare laws and regulations that may affect our ability to operate include, but are not limited to:

58

The scope and enforcement of each of these laws is uncertain and subject to rapid change in the current environment of healthcare reform, especially in light of the lack of applicable precedent and regulatory guidance. Federal and state enforcement bodies have recently increased their scrutiny of interactions between healthcare companies, healthcare providers and other third parties, including charitable foundations, which has led to a number of investigations, prosecutions, convictions and settlements in the healthcare industry. Responding to investigations can be time-and resource-consuming and can divert management’s attention from our business. Any such investigation or settlement could increase our costs or otherwise have an adverse effect on our business.

If our marketing or other arrangements were determined to violate anti-kickback or related laws, including the FCA or an all-payor law, then we could be subject to penalties, including administrative, civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, the exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs, individual imprisonment, reputational harm and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, as

59

well as additional reporting obligations and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or other agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws. Any action for violation of these laws, even if successfully defended, could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert management’s attention from the operation of our business. Prohibitions or restrictions on sales or withdrawal of future marketed products could materially affect our business in an adverse way. Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements will comply with applicable healthcare laws may involve substantial costs.

State and federal authorities have aggressively targeted pharmaceutical companies for alleged violations of these anti-fraud statutes, based on improper research or consulting contracts with doctors, certain marketing arrangements with pharmacies and other healthcare providers that rely on volume-based pricing, off-label marketing schemes, and other improper promotional practices. Companies targeted in such prosecutions have paid substantial fines, have been ordered to implement extensive corrective action plans, and have in many cases become subject to consent decrees severely restricting the manner in which they conduct their business, among other consequences. Additionally, federal and state regulators have brought criminal actions against individual employees responsible for alleged violations. If we become the target of such an investigation or prosecution based on our contractual relationships with providers or institutions, or our marketing and promotional practices, we could face similar sanctions, which would materially harm our business.

Also, the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”) and similar worldwide anti-bribery laws, including the Canadian Corruption of Foreign Public Officials Act, generally prohibit companies and their intermediaries from making improper payments to non-U.S. officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. Our internal control policies and procedures may not protect us from reckless or negligent acts committed by our employees, future distributors, partners or agents. Violations of these laws, or allegations of such violations, could result in fines, penalties or prosecution and have a negative impact on our business, results of operations and reputation. For additional information regarding the compliance of our operations with the FCPA and non-U.S. laws and regulations, see the Risk Factor entitled “Additional laws and regulations governing international operations may preclude or delay us from developing, manufacturing or selling certain products and product candidates outside the United States, which could limit our growth potential and increase our development costs.”

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

Among other matters, U.S. and non-U.S. anti-corruption, anti-money laundering, export control, sanctions, and other trade laws and regulations (collectively, the “Trade Laws”) prohibit companies and their employees, agents, clinical research organizations, legal counsel, accountants, consultants, contractors, and other 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 the 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 also expect our non-U.S. activities to increase intime, including when and if we conduct clinical trials outside the United States. We plan to engage third parties for clinical trials and/or to obtain necessary permits, licenses, patent registrations and other regulatory approvals and we can be held liable for the corrupt or other illegal activities of our personnel, agents, even if we do not explicitly authorize or have prior knowledge of such activities.

60

Risks Related to International Operations

We are an international organization and we plan to expand operations internationally where we have limited operating experience and where we may be subject to increased regulatory risks and local competition. If we are unsuccessful in any efforts to expand internationally, our business and results of operations may be adversely affected.

We are already an international organization and we plan to further expand our operations internationally. We currently source drug product excipients and other product components that are critical to our manufacturing processes from CMOs located in the European Union. In the future, we expect to opportunistically engage with CMOs located in other non-U.S. jurisdictions to facilitate the manufacture of our products on a basis that is cost effective and responsive to customer demand. As part of our business strategy, we plan to commercialize EG-70 and other current and future products under development for sale in the United States and non-U.S. jurisdictions. Our business strategy incorporates potential international operational expansion, independently and through third parties as we seek to obtain regulatory approval for, and commercialize, our product candidates in patient populations outside the United States. If approved, we may hire sales representatives and conduct physician and patient association outreach activities outside of the United States. Doing business internationally involves a number of risks, including, but not limited to:

61

Any of these factors could harm our future international expansion and operations and, consequently, our results of operations.

Global economic uncertainty, changes in geopolitical conditions and weakening product demand caused by political instability, changes in trade agreements and disputes, such as the conflict between Russia and Ukraine and other macroeconomic factors, could adversely affect our business and results of operations.

Our operations and performance depend on global, regional and U.S. economic and geopolitical conditions. General worldwide economic conditions have experienced significant instability in recent years, including due to recent global economic uncertainty and turbulent financial market conditions. Russia’s ongoing military invasion of Ukraine has triggered significant sanctions from U.S. and European leaders and disruptions to financial markets around the world. Resulting changes in U.S. trade policy could trigger retaliatory actions by Russia, its allies and other affected countries, including China, resulting in a “trade war.” In addition, changes in political conditions in China and changes in the state of China-U.S. relations, including any tensions relating to potential military conflict between China and Taiwan, are difficult to predict and could adversely affect our business. Furthermore, if other countries, including the United States, become further involved in the conflict, we could face significant adverse effects to our business and financial condition.

The uncertain financial markets, disruptions in supply chains, mobility restraints, and changing priorities as well as volatile asset values could impact our business in the future. For example, increasing inflation has raised operating costs for us and many businesses, and, in the future, could impact demand, pricing or the cost we incur to manufacture our product candidates, foreign exchange rates (including in particular U.S. dollar and Canadian dollar exchange rates) or employee wages. Inflation rates have increased recently to levels not seen in years. Among other potential effects, increased inflation may result in reduced liquidity and limits on our ability to access credit or otherwise raise capital. The Federal Reserve has raised, and may again raise, interest rates in response to concerns about inflation, which coupled with reduced government spending and volatility in financial markets may have the effect of further increasing economic uncertainty and heightening these risks and creating new, unforeseen risks to our operations.

Actual events involving reduced or limited liquidity, defaults, non-performance or other adverse developments that affect financial institutions or other companies in the financial services industry or the financial services industry generally, or concerns or rumors about any events of these kinds, have in the past and may in the future lead to market-wide liquidity problems. For example, on March 10, 2023, Silicon Valley Bank, was closed by the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, which appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation as receiver. Although we did not lose any cash or cash equivalent balances in connection with the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank, uncertainty and liquidity concerns in the broader financial services industry remain and the failure of Silicon Valley Bank and its potential near-and long-term effects on the biotechnology industry and its participants, such as certain of our vendors, suppliers, and investors, may also adversely affect our operations and stock price.

These conditions make it extremely difficult for us to accurately forecast and plan future business activities. The above factors, including a number of other known and unknown economic and geopolitical factors in the United States and abroad, could ultimately have material adverse effects on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We expect certain of our research and development and manufacturing activities may take place in non-U.S. jurisdictions, such as China, through third-party CROs, collaborators or manufacturers. A significant disruption in the operation of those CROs, collaborators or manufacturers could materially adversely affect our business and results of operations.

We may contract many of our research, manufacturing and preclinical activities to third parties outside the United States, including without limitation, in China. Any disruption in the operations of such third parties or in

62

their ability to meet our needs, whether as a result of a natural disaster, war or other causes, could impair our ability to operate our business on a day-to-day basis and to continue development of our programs. Furthermore, since many of these third parties are located outside the United States, we are exposed to the possibility of disruption and increased costs in the event of changes in the policies of the United States or non-U.S. governments, war, political unrest or unstable economic conditions in any of the countries where we conduct such activities. For example, a war or trade war could lead to tariffs, embargoes, sanctions or other limitations on trade, including without limitation those placed on Russia as a result of its ongoing military invasion of Ukraine, that may affect our ability to source from affected third parties the reagents and raw materials used in our product candidates. Additionally, a natural disaster, war, civil or political unrest or similar circumstances could hinder our ability to maintain or initiate clinical studies at our preferred sites, causing trial initiation or implementation delays. Any of these matters could materially and adversely affect our product development timelines, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Additional laws and regulations governing international operations may preclude or delay us from developing, manufacturing or selling certain products and product candidates outside the United States, which could limit our growth potential and increase our development costs.

As an international company with operations outside of the United States, we must dedicate additional resources to comply with numerous laws and regulations in each jurisdiction in which we operate. The FCPA prohibits any U.S. individual or business from paying, offering, authorizing payment or offering of anything of value, directly or indirectly, to any non-U.S. official, political party or candidate for the purpose of influencing any act or decision of the non-U.S. entity in order to assist the individual or business in obtaining or retaining business. The FCPA also obligates companies whose securities are listed in the United States to comply with certain accounting provisions requiring the company to maintain books and records that accurately and fairly reflect all transactions of the corporation, including international subsidiaries, and to devise and maintain an adequate system of internal accounting controls for international operations.

Compliance with the FCPA is expensive and difficult, particularly in countries in which corruption is a recognized problem. In addition, the FCPA presents particular challenges in the pharmaceutical industry, because, in many countries, hospitals are operated by the government and doctors and other hospital employees are considered non-U.S. officials. Certain payments to hospitals in connection with clinical trials and other work have been deemed to be improper payments to government officials and have led to FCPA enforcement actions.

Various laws, regulations and executive orders also restrict the use and dissemination outside of the United States, or the sharing with certain non-U.S. nationals, of information classified for national security purposes, as well as certain products and technical data relating to those products. As we continue to expand our presence outside of the United States, we will need to dedicate additional resources to complying with these laws, and these laws may preclude us from developing, manufacturing or selling certain products and product candidates outside of the United States, which could limit our growth potential and increase our development costs.

The failure to comply with laws governing international business practices may result in substantial civil and criminal penalties and suspension or debarment from government contracting. The SEC also may suspend or bar issuers from trading securities on U.S. securities exchanges for violations of the FCPA’s accounting provisions.

63

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

If we are unable to obtain and maintain, enforce and defend patent protection for any product candidates we develop or for our novel gene therapy platform, or if the scope of the patent protection obtained is not sufficiently broad, our competitors or other third parties could develop and commercialize products or technology similar or identical to ours and our ability to successfully commercialize any product candidates we may develop and our technology may be adversely affected.

Our success depends in large part on our and our licensors’ ability to seek, obtain and maintain patent and other intellectual property protection in the United States, Canada and other jurisdictions with respect to any product candidates we may develop and our technology, including our gene therapy platform, manufacturing processes and their respective components, formulations, combination therapies, methods of treatment, processes and development that are important to our business, as well as successfully defending these patents and other intellectual property against third-party challenges. The risks associated with patent rights generally apply to patent rights that we in-license now or in the future, as well as patent rights that we may own now or in the future. We have sought, and will seek, to protect our proprietary position by filing patent applications in the United States and abroad related to certain technologies and our gene therapy platform that are important to our business. However, elements of our patent portfolio are at an early stage and there can be no assurance as to whether or when such patent applications will issue as granted patents. Our ability to stop third parties from making, using, selling, marketing, offering to sell, importing and commercializing any product candidates we may develop and our technology is dependent upon the extent to which we and our licensors have rights under valid and enforceable patents and other intellectual property that cover our gene therapy platform and proprietary technology. If we are or our licensors are unable to secure, maintain, defend and enforce patents and other intellectual property with respect to any product candidates or technology that we may develop, it would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We own certain granted patents and pending patent applications which cover our gene therapy platform, use and/or function, product candidates and their use, and manufacturing processes, as applicable. Our pending Patent Cooperation Treaty (“PCT”) patent application, and any PCT application we may file in the future, is not eligible to become issued patents until, among other things, we file one or more national stage patent applications within 30 to 32 months, depending on the jurisdiction, from such application’s priority date in the jurisdictions in which we are seeking patent protection. Similarly, should we in the future file a pending provisional patent application such application would not be eligible to become an issued patent until, among other things, we file a non-provisional patent application within 12 months of such provisional patent application’s filing date. If we do not timely file such national stage patent applications or non-provisional patent applications, we may lose our priority date with respect to such PCT or provisional patent applications, respectively, and any patent protection on the inventions disclosed in such PCT or provisional patent applications, respectively. While we and our licensors intend to timely file national stage and non-provisional patent applications relating to our PCT and provisional patent applications, respectively, we cannot predict whether any such patent applications will result in the issuance of patents. If we or our licensors do not successfully obtain issued patents, or, if the scope of any patent protection we or our licensors obtain is not sufficiently broad, we will be unable to prevent others from using any product candidates we may develop or our technology or from developing or commercializing technology and products similar or identical to ours or other competing products and technologies. Any failure to obtain or maintain patent protection with respect to gene therapy platform, manufacturing processes or our product candidates and technology would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

The patent prosecution process is expensive, time-consuming and complex, and we and our licensors may not be able to file, prosecute, maintain, defend, enforce or license all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. We and our licensors may not be able to obtain, maintain or defend patents and patent applications due to the subject matter claimed in such patents and patent applications being in the public domain. For example, in some cases, the work of certain academic researchers in the genetic medicine

64

field has entered or will enter the public domain, which may compromise our and our licensors’ ability to obtain patent protection for certain inventions related to or building upon such prior work. It is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output before it is too late to obtain patent protection. Although we enter into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to confidential or patentable aspects of our research and development output, such as our employees, corporate collaborators, outside scientific collaborators, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties, any of these parties may breach these agreements and disclose such output before a patent application is filed, thereby jeopardizing our ability to seek patent protection. Consequently, we would not be able to prevent any third-party from using any of our technology that is in the public domain to compete with our product candidates and technology.

The patent position of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions and has, in recent years, been the subject of much litigation. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of patent rights are highly uncertain. Our pending and future owned and licensed patent applications may not result in patents being issued which protect our technology or product candidates, effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies and products or otherwise provide any competitive advantage. In fact, patent applications may not issue as patents at all, and even if such patent applications do issue as patents, they may not issue in a form, or with a scope of claims, that will provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent others from competing with us or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. In addition, the scope of claims in a patent application can be significantly reduced before the patent is issued, and such scope of an issued patent can be reinterpreted after issuance, and changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States and other jurisdictions may diminish the value of our patent rights or narrow the scope of our patent protection. Furthermore, our competitors or other third parties may be able to circumvent our patents by developing similar or alternative technologies or products in a non-infringing manner.

Third parties have developed technologies that may be related or competitive to our own technologies and product candidates and may have filed or may file patent applications, or may have obtained or may obtain issued patents, claiming inventions that may overlap or conflict with those claimed in our owned or licensed patent applications or issued patents. We may not be aware of all third-party intellectual property rights potentially relating to our current and future product candidates and technology. Publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing or, in some cases, not at all. Therefore, we cannot know for certain whether the inventors of our owned or licensed patents and patent applications were the first to make the inventions claimed in any owned or licensed patents or pending patent applications, or that we were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions. If a third-party can establish that we or our licensors were not the first to make or the first to file for patent protection of such inventions, our owned or licensed patent applications may not issue as patents and even if issued, may be challenged and invalidated or ruled unenforceable.

We may in the future be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators, or other third parties have an interest in our patents or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. For example, inventorship disputes may arise from conflicting obligations of consultants or others who are involved in developing 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, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. 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.

The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, and our owned and licensed patents may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and other

65

jurisdictions. For example, we may be subject to a third-party submission of prior art to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) challenging the validity of one or more claims of our owned or licensed patents. Such submissions may also be made prior to a patent’s issuance, precluding the granting of a patent based on one of our owned or licensed pending patent applications. We may become involved in opposition, derivation, re-examination, inter partes review, post-grant review or interference proceedings and similar proceedings in non-U.S. jurisdictions (for example, opposition proceedings) challenging the validity, priority or other features of patentability of our owned or licensed patent rights. In addition, a third-party may claim that our owned or licensed patent rights are invalid or unenforceable in a litigation. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. An adverse result in any litigation or patent office proceeding could put one or more of our owned or licensed patents at risk of being invalidated, ruled unenforceable or interpreted narrowly and could allow third parties to commercialize products identical or similar to any product candidates we may develop and compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize products without infringing third-party patent rights. Moreover, we, or one of our licensors, may have to participate in interference proceedings declared by the USPTO to determine priority of invention or in post-grant challenge proceedings, such as oppositions in a non-U.S. patent office, that challenge priority of invention or other features of patentability. Such challenges and proceedings may result in loss of patent rights, exclusivity, freedom to operate or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products, or limit the scope and duration of the patent protection of our technology and any product candidates we may develop. Such challenges and proceedings may also result in substantial cost and require significant time from our scientists and management, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us. Moreover, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments related to such challenges and proceedings and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a substantial adverse effect on the price of our common shares.

We may in the future co-own intellectual property rights relating to our gene therapy platform and our future product candidates with third parties. In addition, our licensors may co-own the patent rights we in-license with other third parties with whom we do not have a direct relationship. If we or our licensors do not have exclusive control of the grant of licenses under any such third-party co-owners’ interest in such patent rights or we or our licensors are otherwise unable to secure such exclusive rights, 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 technology. In addition, we may need the cooperation of any such co-owners of our patent rights in order to enforce such patent rights against third parties and such cooperation may not be provided to us. Further, any such co-owner may be able to license a co-owned patent to a third-party we believe infringes such patent, preventing us from obtaining compensation or other remedies from such third-party through litigation or settlement arrangements. We may also become engaged in disputes with our co-owners related to patent prosecution strategy or the apportionment of costs associated with the prosecution, maintenance or enforcement of co-owned patents or patent applications. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations and prospects.

Issued patents covering our product candidates or gene therapy platform could be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged in court or before administrative bodies in the United States or other jurisdictions.

If we initiated legal proceedings against a third-party to enforce a patent covering our gene therapy platform, product candidates or other technologies, the defendant could counterclaim that such patent is invalid or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, including lack of novelty, obviousness, written description, non-enablement or failure to claim patent-eligible subject matter. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could include an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld information material to patentability

66

from the USPTO, or made a misleading statement, during prosecution. Third parties may raise claims challenging the validity or enforceability of our owned or in-licensed patents before administrative bodies in the United States or abroad, even outside the context of litigation. Such mechanisms include re-examination, post-grant review, inter partes review, interference proceedings, derivation proceedings and equivalent proceedings in non-U.S. jurisdictions (e.g., opposition proceedings). Such proceedings could result in the revocation of, cancellation of, or amendment to our patents in such a way that they no longer cover our product candidates or other technologies or prevent third parties from competing with us. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. With respect to the validity question, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art, of which we and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. If a third-party were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on the gene therapy platform, our product candidates or other technologies. Such a loss of patent protection would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

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

Changes in either patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States and other jurisdictions could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our product candidates and gene therapy platform.

Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of patent applications and the enforcement or defense of issued patents. Prior to March 2013, in the United States, the first to invent an invention was entitled to a patent claiming the invention, while outside the United States, the first to file a patent application was entitled to the patent, assuming that other requirements for patentability were met. After March 2013, under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (the “America Invents Act”) enacted in September 2011, the United States transitioned to a first inventor to file system in which, assuming that other requirements for patentability are met, the first inventor to file a patent application is entitled to the patent on an invention, regardless of whether a third-party was the first to invent the claimed invention. A third-party that files a patent application in the USPTO after the date of invention but before the filing date of our owned or in-licensed patent application could therefore be awarded a patent covering an invention of ours, even if we had made the invention before it was made by the third-party. This will require us and our licensors to be aware going forward of the time from invention to filing of a patent application. Furthermore, our ability to obtain and maintain valid and enforceable patents depends on whether the differences between our technologies and the prior art allow our technologies to be patentable over the prior art. Since patent applications in the United States and most other countries are confidential for a period of time after filing, we cannot be certain that we were the first to either (1) file any patent application related to our

67

technologies or product candidates or (2) invent any of the inventions claimed in our patents or patent applications. The America Invents Act also includes a number of significant changes that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. These include allowing third-party submissions of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent by USPTO-administered post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review, and derivation proceedings. Because the evidentiary standard in USPTO proceedings is lower than the evidentiary standard in U.S. federal court necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third-party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a claim invalid, even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the claim if first presented in a district court action. Accordingly, a third-party may attempt to use USPTO proceedings to invalidate our owned or in-licensed patent claims that would not have been invalidated if first challenged by the third-party as a defendant in a district court action. Accordingly, the America Invents Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our owned and in-licensed patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our owned and in-licensed issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

In addition, the patent positions of companies in the development and commercialization of pharmaceuticals are particularly uncertain. Supreme Court rulings have narrowed the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances and weakened the rights of patent owners in certain situations. This combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the validity and enforceability of patents. We cannot predict how decisions by the courts, the U.S. Congress or the USPTO may impact the value of our owned or in-licensed patents. Any similar adverse changes in the patent laws of other jurisdictions could also have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Depending on future actions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts, and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that could have a material adverse effect on our existing patent portfolio and our ability to protect and enforce our intellectual property in the future.

Patent terms may be inadequate to protect our competitive position, product candidates or gene therapy platform for an adequate amount of time, and we may need to obtain patent term extension and equivalent extensions outside of the United States for our product candidates or gene therapy platform.

Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, if all maintenance fees are timely paid, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from its earliest filing date of the first U.S. non-provisional patent application to which the patent claims priority. Various adjustments and extensions may be available, but the life of a patent and the protection it affords is limited. Even if patents covering our product candidates are obtained, once the patent life has expired, we may be open to competition from competitive products, including biosimilars. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting our product candidates might expire before or shortly after we commercialize those candidates. As a result, our owned and licensed patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.

Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of any FDA marketing approval of our product candidates or gene therapy platform, one or more U.S. patents that we own or license may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (“the 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 based on the first regulatory approval for a particular drug or biologic. 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. In Europe, supplementary protection certificates are available to extend a patent term up to five years to compensate for patent term lost during regulatory review, and can be extended for an additional six months if data from clinical trials is obtained in accordance with an agreed-upon pediatric investigation plan. Although all

68

countries in Europe must provide supplementary protection certificates, there is no unified legislation among European countries and so supplementary protection certificates must be applied for and granted on a country-by-country basis. This can lead to a substantial cost to apply for and receive these certificates, which may vary among countries or not be provided at all.

We may not be granted any extensions for which we apply in the United States or any other jurisdiction 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. In addition, to the extent we wish to pursue patent term extension based on a patent that we in-license from a third-party, we would need the cooperation of that third-party. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension, or the foreign equivalent, or if the term of any such extension is less than we request, our competitors may be able to enter the market sooner, and our revenue could be reduced. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Our rights to develop and commercialize our product candidates and gene therapy platform may be subject, in part, to the terms and conditions of licenses.

We are reliant upon licenses to certain intellectual property and proprietary technologies from third parties that are important or necessary to the development of our technologies and product candidates. We have entered into license agreements with third parties and may need to obtain additional licenses from others to advance our research or allow commercialization of product candidates we may develop. It is possible that we may be unable to obtain or maintain additional licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to redesign our technologies, product candidates, or the methods for manufacturing them or to develop or license replacement technologies, all of which may not be feasible on a technical or commercial basis. If we are unable to do so, we may be unable to develop or commercialize the affected product candidates, which could significantly harm our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. We cannot provide any assurances that third- party patents do not exist which might be enforced against our technologies and product candidates resulting in either an injunction prohibiting our manufacture or sales, or, with respect to our sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties and/or other forms of compensation to third parties, which could be significant.

Our current and future licenses may not provide exclusive rights to use such intellectual property and proprietary technologies in all relevant fields of use and in all territories in which we may wish to develop or commercialize our technologies 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 all of our licenses.

In addition, subject to the terms of any such license agreements, we may not have the right to control the preparation, filing, prosecution, maintenance, enforcement, and defense of patents and patent applications covering the technologies that we license from third parties. In such an event, we cannot be certain that these patents and patent applications will be prepared, filed, prosecuted, maintained, enforced, and defended in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business or in compliance with applicable laws and regulations, or will result in valid and enforceable patents and other intellectual property rights. It is possible that our licensors’ infringement proceedings or defense activities may be less vigorous than had we conducted them ourselves or may not be conducted in accordance with our best interests. If our licensors fail to prosecute, maintain, enforce, and defend such patents, or lose rights to those patents or patent applications, the rights we have licensed may be reduced or eliminated, and our right to develop and commercialize any of our products that are subject of such licensed rights could be adversely affected.

Our licensors may have relied on third-party consultants or collaborators or on funds from third parties such that our licensors are not the sole and exclusive owners of the patents we in-licensed. If other third parties have

69

ownership rights to our in-licensed patents, they may be able to license such patents to our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technologies. This could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

In spite of our best efforts, our licensors might conclude that we have materially breached our license agreements and might therefore terminate our license agreements, thereby removing our ability to develop and commercialize products and technologies covered by these license agreements. If these license agreements are terminated, or if the underlying patents fail to provide the intended exclusivity, competitors would have the freedom to seek regulatory approval of, and to market, products identical to ours. This could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We may be unable to acquire or in-license any relevant third-party intellectual property rights that we identify as necessary or important to our business and results of operations.

We may be unable to acquire or in-license intellectual property rights from third parties relating to, or necessary for, the development of our product candidates on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. In that event, we may be unable to develop or commercialize such product candidates. Because our programs may involve additional product candidates that may require the use of proprietary rights held by third parties, the growth of our business will likely depend in part on our ability to acquire, in-license or use these proprietary rights.

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

The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area and companies that may be more established or have greater resources than we do may also be pursuing strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider necessary or attractive in order to commercialize our product candidates. More established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, cash resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. Furthermore, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. In addition, we expect that competition for the in-licensing or acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights for product candidates that are attractive to us may increase in the future, which may mean fewer suitable opportunities for us as well as higher acquisition or licensing costs. We may be unable to in-license or acquire the third-party intellectual property rights for product candidates on terms that would allow us to make an appropriate return on our investment. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to suitable product candidates, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects for growth may be harmed.

70

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

We have a non-exclusive license under certain patents and/or know-how to develop and commercialize certain elements or components of our potential product candidates which may not be available elsewhere. Our existing license agreements impose, and we expect that any future license agreements will impose on us, various obligations. If we fail to comply with our obligations under these agreements, the licensor may have the right to terminate the license. If any of our licenses are terminated and we are not able to negotiate other agreements for use of the intellectual property protections underlying these product candidates, we would not be able to manufacture and market these potential products, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

In addition, certain provisions in our license agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations. The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology, or increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the agreement, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Moreover, if disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on commercially acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates, which could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In addition, certain of these license agreements, may not be assignable by us without the consent of the respective licensor, which may have an adverse effect on our ability to engage in certain transactions. Moreover, we may seek to obtain additional licenses from our licensors and, in connection with obtaining such licenses, we may agree to amend our existing licenses in a manner that may be more favorable to the licensors.

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

Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on our product candidates and other technologies in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside of the United States and Canada are less extensive than those in the United States and Canada. In addition, the laws of countries outside the United States and Canada may not protect our or our licensors’ rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States and Canada, even in jurisdictions where we or our licensors do pursue patent protection. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our or our licensors’ inventions in all countries outside the United States and Canada, even in jurisdictions where we or our

71

licensors do pursue patent protection, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States, Canada or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we and our licensors have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and, further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States and Canada. These products may compete with our products and our or our licensors’ 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 non-U.S. jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology products, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents, if pursued and obtained, or marketing of competing products in violation of our intellectual property and proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our or our licensors’ intellectual property and proprietary rights in non-U.S. jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our or our licensors’ patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, could put our or our licensors’ patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We or our licensors may not prevail in any lawsuits that we or our licensors initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property and proprietary rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or 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 harmed and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be adversely affected. Patent protection must ultimately be sought on a country-by-country basis, which is an expensive and time-consuming process with uncertain outcomes. Accordingly, we may choose not to seek patent protection in certain countries and we will not have the benefit of patent protection in such countries.

We may be involved in legal proceedings in relation to intellectual property rights and to protect or enforce our patents or the patents of our licensors, which could be expensive, time-consuming and unsuccessful.

Competitors may infringe our patents or the patents of our licensors. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming, and we may not have the financial resources to do so. In addition, in an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that one or more of our patents is not valid or is unenforceable or may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology in question. An adverse result in any litigation or defense proceedings could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated, held unenforceable or interpreted narrowly and could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing. Defense of these types of claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business.

We may choose to challenge the patentability of claims in a third-party’s U.S. patent by requesting that the USPTO review the patent claims in an ex-parte re-examination, inter partes review or post-grant review proceedings. These proceedings are expensive and may consume our time or other resources. We may choose to challenge a third-party’s patent in patent opposition proceedings in the European Patent Office (“EPO”), or another non-U.S. patent office. The costs of these opposition proceedings could be substantial, and may consume our time or other resources. If we fail to obtain a favorable result at the USPTO, EPO or other patent office then we may be exposed to litigation by a third-party alleging that the patent may be infringed by our product candidates or proprietary technologies.

72

In addition, because some patent applications in the United States may be maintained in secrecy until the patents are issued, patent applications are typically not published in the United States until 18 months after their respective filing dates. Further, publications in the scientific literature often lag behind actual discoveries. Consequently, we cannot be certain that others have not filed patent applications for technology covered by our owned and in-licensed issued patents or our pending applications, or that we or, if applicable, a licensor were the first to invent the technology. It is possible that our competitors may have filed, and may in the future file, patent applications covering our products or technology similar to ours and that those patent applications may have priority over our owned and in-licensed patent applications or patents, which could require us to obtain rights to issued patents covering such technologies. If another party has filed a U.S. patent application on inventions similar to those owned by or in-licensed to us, we or, in the case of in-licensed technology, the licensor may have to participate in an interference proceeding declared by the USPTO to determine priority of invention in the United States. If we or one of our licensors is a party to an interference proceeding involving a U.S. patent application on inventions owned by or in-licensed to us, we may incur substantial costs, divert management’s time and expend other resources, even if we are successful.

Interference proceedings provoked by third parties or brought 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 in an interference proceeding could result in a loss of our current patent rights and 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. Litigation or interference proceedings may result in a decision adverse to our interests and, even if we are successful, may result in substantial costs and distract our management and other employees.

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, that perception could have a substantial adverse effect on the price of our common shares. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing or distribution activities.

We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to adequately conduct such litigation or proceedings. Some of our competitors or other third parties may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources and more mature and developed intellectual property portfolios. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

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

In addition to the protection afforded by patents, we rely on trade secret protection, confidentiality agreements, and license and other agreements to protect proprietary know-how that is not patentable or that we elect not to patent, 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. 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. Furthermore, the laws of some countries outside of the United States do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent or in the same manner as the laws of the United States. As a result, we may encounter significant problems in protecting and defending our intellectual property both in the United States and abroad. 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

73

market, which could materially adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition. Some courts both within and outside the United States and Canada are sometimes less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. If we choose to go to court to stop a third-party from using any of our trade secrets, we may incur substantial costs. These lawsuits may consume our time and other resources even if we are successful. For example, significant elements of our gene therapy platform and product candidates, including aspects of sample preparation, methods of manufacturing, cell culturing conditions, computational-biological algorithms and related processes are based on unpatented trade secrets that are not publicly disclosed. Although we take steps to protect our proprietary information and trade secrets, including through contractual means with our employees and consultants, third parties may independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary information and techniques or otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or disclose our technology.

Thus, we may not be able to meaningfully protect our trade secrets. It is our policy to require our employees, consultants, outside scientific collaborators, sponsored researchers and other advisors to execute confidentiality agreements upon the commencement of employment or consulting relationships with us. These agreements provide that certain information and data concerning our business made known to the individual or entity during the course of the party’s relationship with us is to be kept confidential and not disclosed to third parties except in specific circumstances. However, we may not be able to prevent the unauthorized disclosure or use of our technical know-how or other trade secrets by the parties to these agreements. Monitoring unauthorized uses and disclosures is difficult and we do not know whether the steps we have taken to protect our proprietary technologies will be effective. Moreover, we cannot guarantee that we have entered into such agreements with each party that may have or has had access to our trade secrets or proprietary technology and processes. In addition, we take other appropriate precautions, such as physical and technological security measures, to guard against misappropriation of our proprietary technology by third parties. We have also adopted policies and conduct training that provides guidance on our expectations, and our advice for best practices, in protecting our trade secrets. However, we cannot provide assurance that these agreements and policies will not be breached by our employees, consultants, outside scientific collaborators, sponsored researchers and other advisors and that our trade secrets and other proprietary and confidential information will not be disclosed to publicly or to competitors. If any of the employees, consultants, outside scientific collaborators, sponsored researchers and other advisors who are parties to these agreements breach or violate the terms of any of these agreements, we may not have adequate remedies for any such breach or violation.

In addition, our trade secrets may otherwise become known or be independently discovered by competitors or other third parties. Competitors or third parties could attempt to replicate some or all of the competitive advantages we derive from our development efforts, willfully infringe our intellectual property rights, design around our protected technology or develop their own competitive technologies that fall outside the scope of our intellectual property rights. If any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor or other third-party, we would have no right to prevent them, or those to whom they communicate such trade secrets, from using that technology or information to compete with us. If our trade secrets are not adequately protected so as to protect our market against competitors’ products, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially and adversely affected.

Third-party claims of intellectual property infringement, misappropriation or other violation against us, our licensors or our collaborators may prevent or delay the development and commercialization of our novel gene therapy platform, our product candidates and other technologies.

The field of biotherapeutics, including the development of gene therapies, is competitive and dynamic. Due to the focused research and development that is taking place by several companies, including us and our competitors, in this field, the intellectual property landscape is in flux and it may remain uncertain in the future. As such, there may be significant intellectual property related litigation and proceedings relating to our owned and in-licensed and other third-party intellectual property and proprietary rights in the future.

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

74

However, our research, development and commercialization activities may be subject to claims that we infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate patents or other intellectual property rights owned or controlled by third parties. There is a substantial amount of complex litigation involving patents and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, as well as administrative proceedings for challenging patents, including interference, derivation and reexamination proceedings before the USPTO or oppositions and other comparable proceedings in jurisdictions outside of the United States. As discussed above, recently, due to changes in U.S. law referred to as patent reform, new procedures including inter partes review and post-grant review have been implemented. As stated above, this reform adds uncertainty to the possibility of challenge to our patents in the future.

Numerous U.S., Canadian and other foreign issued patents and pending patent applications owned by third parties exist relating to gene therapy technologies and products and in the fields in which we are developing our product candidates. As the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries expand and more patents are issued, the risk increases that our gene therapy platform, product candidates and other technologies may give rise to claims of infringement of the patent rights of others. We cannot be sure that our gene therapy platform, product candidates and other technologies that we have developed, are developing or may develop in the future do not infringe existing patents or will not infringe future patents owned by third parties. Many companies and institutions have filed, and continue to file, patent applications related to gene therapy and related manufacturing methods. Some of these patent applications have already been allowed or issued and others may issue in the future. It is difficult for industry participants, including us, to identify all third-party patent rights that may be relevant to our gene therapy platform, product candidates and other technologies because patent searching is imperfect due to differences in terminology among patents, incomplete databases and the difficulty in assessing the meaning of patent claims. We may not be aware of patents that have already been issued and that a third- party, for example, a competitor in the fields in which we are developing our gene therapy platform, product candidates and other technologies might assert are infringed by our current or future product candidates, gene therapy platform or other technologies, including claims to compositions, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods of use or treatment that cover our gene therapy platform, product candidates and other technologies. It is also possible that patents owned by third parties of which we are aware, but which we do not believe are relevant to our gene therapy platform, product candidates and other technologies, could be found to be infringed by our gene therapy platform, product candidates and other technologies. In addition, because patent applications can take many years to issue, may be confidential for 18 months or more after filing and can be revised before issuance, there may be currently pending patent applications that may later result in issued patents that our gene therapy platform, product candidates and other technologies may infringe. Furthermore, applications filed before November 29, 2000 and certain applications filed after that date that will not be filed outside the United States may remain confidential until a patent issues. Additionally, pending patent applications that have been published can, subject to certain limitations, be later amended in a manner that could cover our product candidates or technologies. We cannot provide any assurances that third-party patents do not exist which might be enforced against our current technology, including our gene therapy platform, manufacturing methods, product candidates, or future methods or products resulting in either an injunction prohibiting our manufacture or future sales, or, with respect to our future sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties and/or other forms of compensation to third parties, which could be significant.

Third parties have patents and may obtain patents in the future and may claim that the manufacture, use or sale of our gene therapy platform, product candidates or other technologies infringes upon these patents. Patent and other types of intellectual property litigation can involve complex factual and legal questions, and their outcome is uncertain. In the event that any third-party claims that we infringe their patents or that we are otherwise employing their proprietary technology without authorization and initiates litigation against us, even if we believe such claims are without merit, a court of competent jurisdiction could hold that such patents are valid, enforceable and infringed by our gene therapy platform, product candidates or other technologies. In order to successfully challenge the validity of any such U.S. patent in federal court, we would need to overcome a presumption of validity. As this burden is a high one requiring us to present clear and convincing evidence as to the invalidity of any such U.S. patent claim, there is no assurance that a court of competent jurisdiction would

75

invalidate the claims of any such U.S. patent or find that our product candidates or technology did not infringe any such claims. Further, even if we were successful in defending against any such claims, such claims could require us to divert substantial financial and management resources that we would otherwise be able to devote to our business. If we are found to infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate a third-party’s valid and enforceable patent rights, the holders of such patents may be able to block our ability to commercialize the applicable product candidate or technology unless we obtain a license under the applicable patents, or until such patents expire or are finally determined to be held invalid or unenforceable. Such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we are able to obtain a license, the license would likely obligate us to pay substantial license fees or royalties or both and the rights granted to us might be non-exclusive, which could result in our competitors and other third parties gaining access to the same intellectual property. If we are unable to obtain a necessary license to a third-party patent on commercially reasonable terms, we may be unable to commercialize our gene therapy platform, product candidates or other technologies, or such commercialization efforts may be significantly delayed, which could in turn significantly harm our business.

Defense of infringement claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of management and other employee resources from our business and may impact our reputation. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may be enjoined from further developing, manufacturing or commercializing our infringing gene therapy platform, product candidates or other technologies. In addition, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, obtain one or more licenses from third parties, pay royalties and/or redesign our infringing product candidates or technologies, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. In that event, we would be unable to further develop and commercialize the gene therapy platform, our product candidates or other technologies, which could harm our business significantly. Moreover, we may face patent infringement claims from nonpracticing entities that have no relevant product revenue and against whom our owned or licensed patent portfolio may therefore have no deterrent effect.

Engaging in litigation to defend against third parties alleging that we have infringed, misappropriated or otherwise violated their patents or other intellectual property rights is very expensive, particularly for a company of our size and time-consuming. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of litigation or administrative proceedings more effectively than we can because of greater financial resources. Patent litigation and other proceedings may also absorb significant management time. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings against us could have an adverse effect on our ability to raise additional funds and attract collaborators and could impair our ability to compete in the marketplace. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation or administrative proceedings, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure. The occurrence of any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

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

Many of our employees, consultants or advisors are currently, or were previously, employed at universities or other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Although we try to ensure that our employees, consultants and advisors do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that these individuals or we have used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any such individual’s current or former employer. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or be required to obtain licenses to such intellectual property rights, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. An inability to incorporate such intellectual property rights would harm our business and may prevent us from successfully commercializing any product candidates we may develop or at all. In

76

addition, we may lose personnel as a result of such claims and any such litigation or the threat thereof may adversely affect our ability to hire employees or contract with independent contractors. A loss of key personnel or their work product could hamper or prevent our ability to commercialize any product candidates we may develop and our technology, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to our scientific and management personnel.

In addition, while it is our policy to require our employees and contractors who may be involved in the conception or development of intellectual property to execute agreements assigning such intellectual property to us, we may be unsuccessful in executing such an agreement with each party who, in fact, conceives or develops intellectual property that we regard as our own. Moreover, even when we obtain agreements assigning intellectual property to us, the assignment of intellectual property rights may not be self-executing or the assignment agreements may be breached, and we may be forced to bring claims against third parties, or defend claims that they may bring against us, to determine the ownership of what we regard as our intellectual property. Furthermore, individuals executing agreements with us may have pre-existing or competing obligations to a third-party, such as an academic institution, and thus an agreement with us may be ineffective in perfecting ownership of inventions developed by that individual. Disputes about the ownership of intellectual property that we own may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

In addition, we or our licensors may in the future be subject to claims by former employees, consultants or other third parties asserting an ownership right in our owned or licensed patent rights. An adverse determination in any such submission or proceeding may result in loss of exclusivity or freedom to operate or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar technology and therapeutics, without payment to us, or could limit the duration of the patent protection covering our technology and any product candidates we may develop. Such challenges may also result in our inability to develop, manufacture or commercialize our technology and product candidates without infringing third-party patent rights. In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our owned or licensed patent rights are threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize current or future technology and product candidates. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on 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:

77

Should any of these events occur, they could significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We may not be able to protect and enforce our trademarks and trade names, or build name recognition in our markets of interest thereby harming our competitive position.

Our current and future trademark applications in the United States and in foreign jurisdictions may not be allowed or may subsequently be opposed. Once filed and registered, our registered trademarks or trade names 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 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. As a means to enforce our trademark rights and prevent infringement, we may be required to file trademark claims against third parties or initiate trademark opposition proceedings. This can be expensive and time-consuming, particularly for a company of our size. In addition, there could be potential trade name or trademark infringement claims brought by owners of other registered trademarks or trademarks that incorporate variations of our registered or unregistered trademarks or trade names. Over the long term, if we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, then we may not be able to compete effectively and our business may be adversely affected. Our efforts to enforce or protect our proprietary rights related to trademarks, trade secrets, 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 competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Risks Related to Acquisitions and Collaborations

We will need to grow the size of our organization, both organically and through acquisitions, and we may experience difficulties identifying and hiring the right employees and successfully managing this growth.

As of October 31, 2023, we had 33 employees, two of whom worked less than full-time, and we are engaged with six consultants (contractors) on a regular basis. As our development and commercialization plans and strategies develop, we may experience significant growth in the number of our employees and the scope of our operations, particularly in the areas of technology research, product development and manufacturing, regulatory affairs and, if any product candidates are submitted for or receive marketing approval, sales, marketing and distribution. Our management, personnel and systems currently in place may not be adequate to support this future growth. Future growth would impose significant added responsibilities on members of management, including:

78

Our future financial performance and our ability to commercialize our product candidates may depend, in part, on our ability to effectively manage any future growth and our management may also have to divert a disproportionate amount of its attention away from day-to-day activities in order to devote a substantial amount of time to managing these growth activities.

We currently rely, and for the foreseeable future will continue to rely, in substantial part on certain independent organizations, advisors, contractors and consultants to provide certain services, including substantially all aspects of regulatory approval, clinical management and manufacturing. There can be no assurance that the services of independent organizations, advisors, contractors and consultants will continue to be available to us on a timely basis when needed or that we will be able to find qualified replacements. In addition, if we are unable to effectively manage our outsourced activities or if the quality or accuracy of the services provided by independent organizations, advisors, contractors or consultants is compromised for any reason, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval of our product candidates or otherwise advance our business. There can be no assurance that we will be able to manage our existing independent organizations, advisors, contractors or consultants or find other competent resources on economically reasonable terms, or at all.

If we are not able to effectively expand our organization by hiring new employees and expanding the roster of independent organizations, advisors and consultants on whom we rely on an outsourced basis, we may not be able to successfully implement the tasks necessary to further develop and commercialize our product candidates and, accordingly, may not achieve our research, development and commercialization goals.

Acquisitions, collaborations or other strategic partnerships 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 from time to time evaluate collaborations and strategic partnerships or potential acquisitions, including licensing or acquiring molecules for use in our gene therapy platform, intellectual property rights, technologies or businesses. For example, we may seek collaboration arrangements for the commercialization, or potentially for the development, of certain of our product candidates depending on the merits of retaining commercialization rights for ourselves as compared to entering into collaboration arrangements. Collaboration, strategic partnerships or acquisitions entail numerous risks, including:

79

In addition, if we undertake acquisitions, we may 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 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. Any of the foregoing may materially harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We may make acquisitions to expand our business and as a result, our results of operations may be adversely affected.

We may choose to expand our current business through the acquisition of other businesses, products or technologies, or through strategic alliances. Acquisitions involve numerous risks, including the following:

Any of these factors could have a negative impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Risks Relating to Investment in enGene’s Securities

Because enGene is a Canadian company, shareholder protections differ from shareholder protections in the United States and elsewhere, and enGene is subject to a variety of additional risks that may negatively impact enGene’s operations.

Following the continuation of enGene into British Columbia, we are organized and exist under the laws of British Columbia, Canada and, accordingly, are governed by the BCBCA and other relevant laws, which may affect the rights of shareholders differently than those of a company governed by the laws of a U.S. jurisdiction or Cayman Islands law. We are subject to special considerations or risks associated with companies operating in Canada that may, at any time differ from the considerations and risks of companies operating in the United States, including any of the following:

80

In particular, we are subject to the risk of changes in economic conditions, social conditions and political conditions inherent in Canada, including changes in laws and policies that govern international investment, as well as changes in U.S. laws and regulations relating to international trade and investment, including the new trilateral trade agreement among the United States, Mexico and Canada called the United States-Mexico- Canada Agreement (the “USMCA”), which has been ratified by all three countries. The USMCA entered into force on July 1, 2020 and superseded the North American Free Trade Agreement. Although we believe that there have been no immediate effects on enGene’s operations with respect to the USMCA, we cannot predict future developments in the political climate involving the United States, Mexico and Canada and such developments may have a material adverse effect on enGene’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

The Articles and certain Canadian legislation contain provisions that may have the effect of delaying, preventing or making undesirable an acquisition of all or a significant portion of enGene’s shares or assets or preventing a change in control.

Certain provisions of enGene Holdings Inc.’s Articles and certain provisions under the BCBCA, together or separately, could discourage, delay or prevent a merger, acquisition or other change in control of us that shareholders may consider favorable, including transactions in which they might otherwise receive a premium for their common shares. These provisions include the establishment of a staggered board of directors, which divides the board into three groups, with directors in each group serving a three-year term. The existence of a staggered board can make it more difficult for shareholders to replace or remove incumbent members of enGene’s Board of Directors. As such, these provisions could also limit the price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for enGene’s common shares, thereby depressing the market price of enGene’s common shares. In addition, because enGene’s Board of Directors is responsible for appointing the members of enGene’s management team, these provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempts by enGene’s shareholders to replace or remove enGene’s current management by making it more difficult for shareholders to replace members of enGene’s Board of Directors. Among other things, these provisions include the following:

81

A non-Canadian must file an application for review with the Minister responsible for the Investment Canada Act and obtain approval of the Minister prior to acquiring control of a “Canadian business” within the meaning of the Investment Canada Act, where prescribed financial thresholds are exceeded. A reviewable acquisition may not proceed unless the Minister is satisfied that the investment is likely to be of net benefit to Canada. If the applicable financial thresholds were exceeded such that a net benefit to Canada review would be required, this could prevent or delay a change of control and may eliminate or limit strategic opportunities for shareholders to sell their common shares. Furthermore, limitations on the ability to acquire and hold enGene’s common shares may be imposed under the Competition Act (Canada). This legislation has a pre-merger notification regime and mandatory waiting period that applies to certain types of transactions that meet specified financial thresholds, and permits the Commissioner of Competition to review any acquisition, directly or indirectly, including through the acquisition of shares, of control over or of a significant interest in us.

The Articles designate specific courts in Canada and the United States as the exclusive forum for certain litigation that may be initiated by enGene’s shareholders without enGene’s prior written consent, which could limit enGene’s shareholders’ ability to obtain a favourable judicial forum for disputes with us.

Pursuant to the Articles, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the courts of the Province of British Columbia and the appellate courts therefrom shall, to the fullest extent permitted by law, be the sole and exclusive forum for: (a) any derivative action or proceeding brought on enGene’s behalf; (b) any action or proceeding asserting a claim of breach of fiduciary duty owed by any director, officer or other employee of enGene’s to enGene; (c) any action or proceeding asserting a claim arising out of any provision of the BCBCA or the Articles (as either may be amended from time to time); or (d) any action or proceeding asserting a claim or otherwise related to enGene’s affairs (the “Canadian Forum Provision”). In addition, the Articles further provide that unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the United States District Court for the District of Delaware shall be the sole and exclusive forum for resolving any complaint filed in the United States asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act (the “U.S. Forum Provision”). In addition, the Articles provide that any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in enGene’s common shares is deemed to have notice of and consented to the Canadian Forum Provision and the U.S. Forum Provision; provided, however, that shareholders cannot and will not be deemed to have waived enGene’s compliance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder.

The Canadian Forum Provision and the U.S. Forum Provision in the Articles may impose additional litigation costs on shareholders in pursuing any such claims. Additionally, the forum selection clauses in the Articles may limit enGene’s shareholders’ ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that they find favorable for disputes with enGene’s directors, officers or employees, which may discourage the filing of lawsuits against enGene and enGene’s directors, officers and employees, even though an action, if successful, might benefit enGene’s shareholders. In addition, while the Delaware Supreme Court ruled in March 2020 that federal forum selection provisions purporting to require claims under the Securities Act be brought in federal court are “facially valid” under Delaware law, there is uncertainty as to whether other courts, including courts in Canada and other courts within the United States, will enforce enGene’s U.S. Forum Provision. If the U.S. Forum Provision is found to be unenforceable, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such matters. The U.S. Forum Provision may also impose additional litigation costs on shareholders who assert that the provision is not enforceable or invalid. The courts of the Province of British Columbia and the United States District Court for the District of Delaware may also reach different judgments or results than would other courts, including courts where a shareholder considering an action may be located or would otherwise choose to bring the action, and such judgments may be more or less favorable to us than enGene’s shareholders.

Because we are a Canadian company, it may be difficult to serve legal process or enforce judgments against us.

We are incorporated and maintain operations in Canada. In addition, certain directors of enGene are expected to reside in the United States, while others are expected to reside outside of the United States.

82

Accordingly, service of process upon us may be difficult to obtain within the United States. Furthermore, because substantially all of our assets are located outside the United States, any judgment obtained in the United States against us, including one predicated on the civil liability provisions of the U.S. federal securities laws, may not be collectible within the United States. Therefore, it may not be possible to enforce those actions against us.

In addition, it may be difficult to assert U.S. securities law claims in original actions instituted in Canada. Canadian courts may refuse to hear a claim based on an alleged violation of U.S. securities laws against us or these persons on the grounds that Canada is not the most appropriate forum in which to bring such a claim. Even if a Canadian court agrees to hear a claim, it may determine that Canadian law and not U.S. law is applicable to the claim. If U.S. law is found to be applicable, the content of applicable U.S. law must be proved as a fact, which can be a time-consuming and costly process. Certain matters of procedure will also be governed by Canadian law. Furthermore, it may not be possible to subject foreign persons or entities to the jurisdiction of the courts in Canada. Similarly, to the extent that enGene’s assets are located in Canada, investors may have difficulty collecting from us any judgments obtained in the U.S. courts and predicated on the civil liability provisions of U.S. securities provisions.

enGene’s ability to use net operating loss carry-forwards and certain other tax attributes are limited.

For Canadian tax purposes, enGene currently has a substantial pool of net operating losses (known as non-capital losses) and other tax attributes. In general terms, where control of a corporation is acquired or deemed to be acquired, which occurred to enGene as a result of the Transactions, the corporation is subject to a “loss restriction event”, and the corporation’s non-capital loss carryforwards, other losses and certain other tax attributes are subject to limitation and possibly expiry after the loss restriction event. Similar rules are expected to apply for Canadian provincial purposes. Consequently, enGene may not be able to utilize a material portion of its non-capital loss carryforwards and certain other tax attributes in certain circumstances. Non-capital losses and other tax attributes arising prior to the Amalgamation will generally not be available to any capital gains or foreign exchange gains realized as a result of the Transactions. As a result, enGene may have tax payable after the Amalgamation, unless it generates non-capital losses (or other tax attributes) after the Amalgamation in an amount sufficient to offset such gains.

For U.S. tax purposes, net operating loss carryforwards allow companies to use past year net operating losses to offset against future years’ profits, if any, to reduce future tax liabilities. Sections 382 and 383 of the Code limit a corporation’s ability to utilize its net operating loss carryforwards and certain other tax attributes (including research credits) to offset any future taxable income or tax if the corporation experiences a cumulative ownership change of more than 50% over any rolling three-year period. State net operating loss carryforwards (and certain other tax attributes) may be similarly limited. An ownership change can therefore result in significantly greater tax liabilities than a corporation would incur in the absence of such a change and any increased liabilities could adversely affect the corporation’s business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flow. Even if another ownership change has not occurred and does not occur as a result of this offering, additional ownership changes may occur in the future as a result of additional equity offerings or events over enGene will have little or no control, including purchases and sales of its equity by its five percent security holders, the emergence of new five percent security holders, redemptions of its securities or certain changes in the ownership of any of its five percent security holders.

enGene’s ability to claim investment tax credits is limited and enGene will no longer be able to obtain cash refunds on federal tax credits earned.

enGene was eligible to claim Canadian federal and provincial tax credits as a Canadian controlled private corporation (“CCPC”) on eligible scientific research and development expenditures (“SR&ED”). In connection with the Business Combination, enGene lost its status as a CCPC. As such, enGene is no longer eligible for cash refunds on federal tax credits earned with respect to federally eligible SR&ED expenditures. Following the loss of CCPC status, enGene’s federal SR&ED tax credits are earned at a lower rate and may only be used to offset

83

future federal taxes payable. Provincial tax credits earned in Québec in relation to SR&ED are anticipated to continue to result in a cash refund to enGene, albeit at a reduced rate. In enGene’s view, it lost its status as a CCPC in September 2023, however, there is no authority on the exact timing of when this occurred.

There is a significant risk that enGene may be or become a passive foreign investment company (a “PFIC”), which could result in adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences to U.S. Holders of enGene’s Common Shares or Warrants.

In general and as relevant here, a non-U.S. corporation is a PFIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes for any taxable year in which (i) 50% or more of the value of its assets (generally determined on the basis of a quarterly average) consists of assets, including its pro rata share of the assets of any corporation in which it is considered to own at least 25% of the shares by value, that produce, or are held for the production of, passive income, or (ii) 75% or more of its gross income, including its pro rata share of the gross income of any corporation in which it is considered to own at least 25% of the shares by value, consists of passive income. Passive income generally includes dividends, interest, rents and royalties (other than rents or royalties derived from the active conduct of a trade or business) and gains from the disposition of passive assets. Cash and cash equivalents are generally passive assets. The value of goodwill will generally be treated as an active or passive asset based on the nature of the income produced in the activity to which the goodwill is attributable.

The value of enGene’s assets includes the value of its goodwill and other intangible assets not shown on its financial statements, which may be determined, in large part, by reference to the market price of the enGene Common Shares from time to time, which is subject to change and may be particularly volatile while the business is at the pre-commercialization stage. In addition, prior to the commercialization of any of enGene’s drug candidates its income may be primarily passive. Accordingly, there is a significant risk that enGene will be a PFIC for its current or any future taxable year. If enGene is a PFIC for any taxable year during which a U.S. Holder (as defined below) owns enGene Common Shares, the U.S. Holder generally will be subject to adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences, including increased tax liability on disposition gains and certain “excess distributions” and additional reporting requirements, unless the U.S. Holder makes (a) a qualified electing fund (“QEF”) election or a mark-to-market election for the first taxable year for which enGene is or was a PFIC and in which such U.S. Holder held (or was deemed to hold) such Common Shares and maintain such election or (b) a QEF election along with an applicable purging election (collectively, the “PFIC Elections”). Under proposed Treasury regulations relating to PFICs which have a retroactive effective date, the PFIC rules may apply to rights to acquire shares of a PFIC as if they were shares, and thus could apply to dispositions (other than exercises) of Warrants. PFIC Elections may not be made with respect to Warrants. U.S. Holders of enGene Common Shares or Warrants should consult their tax advisors regarding the application of the PFIC rules to enGene and the risks of owning equity securities, including warrants, in a company that may be a PFIC. See “Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations—Passive Foreign Investment Company Rules”.

As a result of making and maintaining a timely and valid QEF election (if eligible to do so), a U.S. Holder of Common Shares must include in income such U.S. Holder’s pro rata share of enGene’s net capital gains (as long-term capital gain) and other earnings and profits (as ordinary income), on a current basis, whether or not distributed, in the taxable year of the U.S. Holder in which enGene’s taxable year ends if enGene is treated as a PFIC with respect to the U.S. Holder. A U.S. Holder generally may make a separate election to defer the payment of taxes on undistributed income inclusions under the QEF rules, but if deferred, any such taxes will be subject to an interest charge. A subsequent distribution of such earnings and profits that were previously included in income should generally not be taxable as a dividend to such U.S. Holder. The tax basis of a U.S. Holder’s shares in a PFIC with respect to which a QEF election has been made will be increased by amounts that are included in income, and decreased by amounts distributed but not taxed as dividends, under the above rules.

The QEF election is made on a shareholder-by-shareholder basis and, once made, can be revoked only with the consent of the IRS. A U.S. Holder generally makes a QEF election by attaching a completed IRS Form 8621 (Information Return by a Shareholder of a Passive Foreign Investment Company or Qualified Electing Fund), including the information provided in a PFIC Annual Information Statement from enGene, to a timely filed U.S.

84

federal income tax return for the tax year to which the election relates. In the event that enGene determines that enGene is a PFIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes for any taxable year, enGene will, upon request of a holder of Common Shares, provide a PFIC Annual Information Statement to such holder. Retroactive QEF elections generally may be made only by filing a protective statement with such federal income tax return and if certain other conditions are met or with the consent of the IRS. U.S. Holders are urged to consult their tax advisors regarding the availability and tax consequences of a retroactive QEF election under their particular circumstances.

As an alternative to a QEF election, if a U.S. Holder owns shares in a company that is a PFIC and the shares are “regularly traded” on a “qualified exchange,” such U.S. Holder could make a mark-to-market election that would result in tax treatment different from that under the interest charge rules described above. The Common Shares will be treated as regularly traded for any calendar year in which more than a de minimis quantity of the Common Shares are traded on a qualified exchange on at least 15 days during each calendar quarter. Nasdaq, where the Common Shares are listed, is a qualified exchange for this purpose.

Such electing U.S. Holder generally will include for each of its taxable years as ordinary income the excess, if any, of the fair market value of its Common Shares at the end of such year over its adjusted basis in its Common Shares. The U.S. Holder also will recognize an ordinary loss in respect of the excess, if any, of its adjusted basis of its Common Shares over the fair market value of its Common Shares at the end of its taxable year (but only to the extent of the net amount of previously included in income as a result of the mark-to-market election). The U.S. Holder’s basis in its Common Shares will be adjusted to reflect any such income or loss amounts. Any gain recognized on a sale or other taxable disposition of its Common Shares will be treated as ordinary income, and any loss will be treated as an ordinary loss (but only to the extent of the net amount previously included in income as a result of the mark-to-market election, with any excess treated as a capital loss).

For purposes of this Risk Factor, a “U.S. Holder” is a beneficial holder of securities who or that, for U.S. federal income tax purposes is (i) an individual who is a United States citizen or resident of the United States; (ii) a corporation or other entity treated as a corporation for United States federal income tax purposes created in, or organized under the law of, the United States or any state or political subdivision thereof; (iii) an estate the income of which is includible in gross income for United States federal income tax purposes regardless of its source; or (iv) a trust (A) the administration of which is subject to the primary supervision of a United States court and which has one or more United States persons (within the meaning of the Code) who have the authority to control all substantial decisions of the trust or (B) that has in effect a valid election under applicable Treasury regulations to be treated as a United States person.

enGene’s Articles include provisions that may discourage takeover attempts, including a classified or “staggered” board.

Certain provisions in the articles of enGene (together with the articles of incorporation and notice of articles, the “Articles”) may have the effect of deterring coercive takeover practices and inadequate takeover bids by making such practices or bids unacceptably expensive to the bidder and by encouraging prospective acquirers to negotiate with the enGene Board rather than to attempt a hostile takeover. These provisions include, among others:

85

While these provisions are not intended to make enGene immune from takeovers, they will apply even if the offer may be considered beneficial by some shareholders and may delay or prevent an acquisition that the enGene Board determines is not in the best interests of enGene and its shareholders. These provisions may also prevent or discourage attempts to remove and replace incumbent directors.

Certain of enGene’s financing agreements place operating restrictions on its business, which may limit its flexibility to respond to opportunities and may have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition and results of operations.

On May 16, 2023, enGene entered into a letter agreement with Investissement Quebec (“IQ”), FEAC and enGene (the “IQ Letter Agreement”), in connection with IQ’s investment in the 2023 Convertible Notes. Among the terms of the IQ Letter Agreement, enGene agreed to comply with certain covenants that may restrict its ability to expand its operations or engage and pursue certain business opportunities.

From the time that IQ first holds enGene Common Shares until the earlier of (1) the date IQ ceases to hold at least 2% of enGene’s outstanding shares on a fully-diluted basis, and (2) the date that is five years after the date of the IQ Letter Agreement, unless enGene receives prior written consent from IQ: (i) enGene must maintain its head office in the Province of Québec, and (ii) enGene shall cause enGene to (A) maintain operations in the Province of Québec, (B) maintain a research and development center in the Province of Québec, and (C) engage at least 20 employees who are residents and work in the Province of Québec (the “Employment Threshold”), provided that, if in good faith, the enGene Board determines that maintaining the Employment Threshold puts enGene at risk of bankruptcy, insolvency or determines that it is in the best interests of enGene to effect a general reduction in workforce, IQ shall not unreasonably withhold consent to reduce the Employment Threshold. Additionally, IQ will, for so long as IQ holds shares representing, in the aggregate, ownership of greater than 2% of enGene on a fully diluted basis, be permitted to have an observer attend any meeting of the enGene Board subject to the terms and conditions of a board observer agreement to be negotiated in good faith between enGene and IQ.

enGene’s compliance with these provisions may affect its ability to react to changes in industry conditions, take advantage of business opportunities it believes to be desirable, hire and retain critical personnel, execute or product development and commercialization initiatives, among other potential effects.

Risks Related to Our Common Shares and Warrants and to Being a Public Company

Sales of Common Shares, or the perception of such sales, by us or the Selling Holders pursuant to this prospectus in the public market or otherwise could cause the market price for our Common Shares to decline and certain Selling Holders still may receive a significant rate of return.

On November 22, 2023, we filed a registration statement on Form S-1, as amended through the date hereof (File No. 333-275700) (the “resale registration statement”) with the SEC to register the issuance of up to an aggregate of 9,794,498 Common Shares upon the exercise of a like number of Warrants as well as the resale from time to time by the selling securityholders named in our resale registration statement (the “Selling Holders”) named therein of (i) up to 47,144,548 of our Common Shares (which includes 6,386,589 Common Shares that may be issued upon exercise of the enGene Warrants); and (ii) up to 6,386,589 of our Warrants. The sale of Common Shares in the public market or otherwise, including sales pursuant to this prospectus, or the perception that such sales could occur, could harm the prevailing market price of our Common Shares. These sales, or the possibility that these sales may occur, also might make it more difficult for enGene to sell equity securities in the future at a time and at a price that it deems appropriate. Resales of Common Shares may cause the market price of our securities to drop significantly, even if enGene’s business is doing well.

Although the FEAC Sponsor and certain other parties named in the Selling Holders table herein will be prohibited from transferring any Common Shares until April 30, 2024 (a period of six months following the Closing Date, subject to certain exceptions), pursuant to the enGene Lock-Up Agreements (as defined below), the Common Shares may be sold after the expiration or early termination or release of the respective applicable

86

lock-up provisions. See “Securities Act Restrictions on Resale of Common Shares — Registration Rights and Lock-Up Agreements.” Selling Holders who received shares pursuant to the 2023 PIPE Financing or the 2024 PIPE Financing are not subject to lock-up restrictions.

We have agreed, at our expense, to prepare and file the resale registration statement of which this prospectus is a part with the SEC. The Common Shares and Warrants being offered for resale in this prospectus which forms a part of the resale registration statement, represent approximately 94.0% of our total outstanding Common Shares and approximately 65.2% of our outstanding Warrants, respectively, as of the date of this prospectus.

Following the expiration of any applicable lock-ups described herein and after the resale registration statement of which this prospectus is a part is effective, and until such time that it is no longer effective, the resale registration statement will permit the resale of these securities. The resale, or expected or potential resale, of a substantial number of our common shares in the public market could adversely affect the market price for our common shares and make it more difficult for you to sell your common shares at times and prices that you feel are appropriate. Furthermore, we expect that, because there will be a large number of shares registered pursuant to the resale registration statement, Selling Holders will continue to offer the securities covered by the resale registration statement for a significant period of time, the precise duration of which cannot be predicted. Accordingly, the adverse market and price pressures resulting from an offering pursuant to a resale registration statement may continue for an extended period of time.

Selling Holders acquired their securities in enGene offered hereby at prices below the current trading price of such securities, and would experience a positive rate of return based on the current trading price. Future investors in our Company may not experience a similar rate of return.

Selling Holders acquired their securities in enGene offered hereby at prices below the current trading prices of such securities. As a result, those Selling Holders would experience a positive rate of return based on the current trading price if they were to sell the securities offered hereby. On February 23, 2024, the closing price of our Common Shares was $15.05 per share and the closing price for our Warrants was $3.80 per warrant. Accordingly, the Selling Holders have an incentive to sell because they will profit on sales due to having purchased their securities at lower prices than the public investors, and in some cases such gains may be significant.

Given the relatively lower purchase prices that some of our Selling Holders paid to acquire securities compared to their current trading prices, these Selling Holders may earn a significant positive rate of return on their investment depending on the market price of our Common Shares and Warrants at the time that such Selling Holders choose to sell their securities. The Selling Holders acquired the securities offered for resale in exchange for non cash consideration, or at effective purchase prices that are below current trading prices, as set forth in further detail in the section titled “Information Related to Offered Securities.” Investors who purchase our Common Shares and Warrants on the Nasdaq following the Business Combination may not experience a similar rate of return on the securities they purchased due to differences in the purchase prices and the current trading price.

There is no assurance that Warrants will be and/or remain in the money prior to their expiration or that the holders of Warrants will elect to exercise any or all of their Warrants for cash; the Warrants may expire worthless.

The exercise price for our Warrants is $11.50 per Common Share. Our Common Shares and Warrants trade on the Nasdaq under the tickers “ENGN” and “ENGNW”, and as of the close of business on February 23, 2024, the closing price of our Common Shares and Warrants on the Nasdaq was $15.05 and $3.80, respectively.

We will receive proceeds from Warrants only in the event that such Warrants are exercised for cash. We believe the likelihood that holders will exercise their Warrants will depend on the trading price of our Common Shares. If the market price for our Common Shares is less than the exercise price of Warrants, we believe the

87

holders of Warrants will be unlikely to exercise them. If the market price for our Common Shares exceeds the exercise price of the Warrants, it is more likely that holders of the Warrants will exercise them.

There is no assurance that Warrants will be in the money and/or remain in the money prior to their expiration or that the holders of Warrants will elect to exercise any or all of their Warrants for cash. As such, the Warrants may expire worthless.

enGene’s management team has limited experience managing a public company, and the additional requirements for public companies may strain resources and divert management’s attention.

The individuals who constitute enGene’s management have not previously managed enGene’s business, or in some cases any business, as a publicly traded company. Compliance with public company requirements places significant additional demands on management and will require them to enhance investor relations, legal, financial reporting and corporate communications functions. enGene’s management is required to devote substantial time to maintaining and improving its internal controls over financial reporting and the requirements of being a public company. These additional efforts may strain resources and divert management’s attention from other business concerns and affect its ability to accurately report its financial results and prevent fraud, which could adversely affect enGene’s business and profitability.

enGene may be unable to satisfy Nasdaq’s listing requirements in the future, which could limit investors’ ability to effect transactions in enGene’s securities and subject it to additional trading restrictions.

In connection with the Business Combination, enGene applied for the listing of the enGene Common Shares and enGene Warrants on Nasdaq, and such securities commenced trading on Nasdaq under the tickers “ENGN” and “ENGNW”, respectively, on November 1, 2023. enGene is required to meet Nasdaq’s continued listing requirements and may be unable to meet those requirements. Although enGene’s securities are listed on the Nasdaq as of the date of this registration statement, enGene may be unable to maintain the listing of its securities in the future.

If enGene fails to meet the continued listing requirements and the Nasdaq delists enGene’s securities from its exchange, there could be significant material adverse consequences, including:

enGene will incur increased costs as a result of operating as a public company, and its management will devote substantial time to new compliance initiatives.

As a privately held company, enGene Inc. was not required to comply with many corporate governance and financial reporting practices and policies required of a publicly traded company. As a publicly traded company, enGene will incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that enGene was not required to incur in the past. In addition, new and changing laws, regulations and standards relating to corporate governance and public disclosure for public companies, including the Dodd-Frank Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, regulations related thereto and the rules and regulations of the SEC and Nasdaq, have increased the costs and the time that must be devoted to compliance matters. We expect these rules and regulations will increase enGene’s legal and financial costs and lead to a diversion of management time and attention from revenue-generating activities.

88

A market for enGene’s securities may not develop, which would adversely affect the liquidity and price of its securities.

The price of enGene’s securities may fluctuate significantly due to the market’s reaction to the Business Combination as well as general market and economic conditions. An active trading market for enGene’s securities following the Business Combination may never develop or, if it develops, it may not be sustained, which could have a material adverse effect on the liquidity and price of enGene’s securities.

enGene could be a target of securities class action and derivative lawsuits, which could result in substantial costs.

enGene’s share price may be volatile and, in the past, companies that have experienced volatility in the market price of their shares have from time to time been subject to securities class action litigation. enGene may be the target of this type of litigation in the future. Litigation of this type could result in substantial costs and diversion of management’s attention and resources, which could have a material adverse effect on enGene business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Any adverse determination in litigation could also subject enGene to significant liabilities.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish research about enGene at all or publish inaccurate or unfavorable research about enGene or its business, the market price and/or the trading volume of the enGene Common Shares could decline.

The trading market for the enGene Common Shares will depend in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about enGene or its business. If no or few securities or industry analysts cover enGene, then the market price for the enGene Common Shares could be adversely affected. If one or more of the analysts who cover enGene downgrade a recommendation with regard to the enGene Common Shares, publish inaccurate or unfavorable research about enGene or its business, cease to cover enGene or fail to publish reports on it regularly, the market price and/or the trading volume of the enGene Common Shares could decline.

89

USE OF PROCEEDS

All of the Common Shares and Warrants offered by the Selling Holders pursuant to this prospectus will be sold by the Selling Holders for their respective accounts. We will not receive any of the proceeds from these sales.

We will receive up to an aggregate of approximately $112,636,727 from the exercise of the Warrants, assuming the exercise in full of all of the Warrants for cash. There is no assurance that Warrants will be and/or remain in the money prior to their expiration or that the holders of Warrants will elect to exercise any or all of their Warrants for cash. We believe the likelihood that these holders will exercise their Warrants, and therefore any cash proceeds that we may receive in relation to the exercise thereof, will depend on the trading price of our Common Shares. If the market price for our Common Shares is less than the exercise price of Warrants, we believe the holders of Warrants will be unlikely to exercise them. If the market price for our Common Shares exceeds the exercise price of the Warrants, we believe the holders of the Warrants will be more likely to exercise them. See “Risk Factors — There is no assurance that Warrants will be and/or remain in the money prior to their expiration or that the holders of Warrants will elect to exercise any or all of their Warrants for cash; the Warrants may expire worthless.”

We expect to use the net proceeds from the exercise of the Warrants, if any, for general corporate purposes. We will have broad discretion over the use of proceeds from the exercise of the Warrants. There is no assurance that the holders of the Warrants will elect to exercise any or all of such Warrants. To the extent that the Warrants are exercised on a “cashless basis,” the amount of cash we would receive from the exercise of the Warrants will decrease.

The Selling Holders will pay any underwriting fees, discounts and selling commissions incurred by such Selling Holders in disposing of their Common Shares. Pursuant to a registration rights agreement entered into by the Company, FEAC Sponsor and certain other shareholders of the Company, the Company will bear all other costs, fees and expenses incurred in effecting the registration of Common Shares covered by this prospectus, including, without limitation, all registration and filing fees, Nasdaq listing fees and fees and expenses of counsel and independent registered public accountants.

CAPITALIZATION

The following table sets forth our cash and cash equivalents and our capitalization as of October 31, 2023 (i) on an actual basis and (ii) on an as adjusted basis giving effect to borrowings under the Amended Loan Agreement entered into on December 22, 2023, and proceeds from the 2024 PIPE Financing. You should read this table together with the information included elsewhere in the prospectus, including “enGene’s Management’s

90

Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and our Consolidated Financial Statements included elsewhere in the prospectus. The following table assumes no exercise of Warrants.

91

DETERMINATION OF OFFERING PRICE

The offering price of the Common Shares underlying the Warrants offered hereby is determined by reference to the exercise price of the Warrants of $11.50 per share. The Warrants are listed on Nasdaq under the symbol “ENGNW.”

We cannot currently determine the price or prices at which Common Shares or Warrants may be sold by the Selling Holders under this prospectus.

MARKET PRICE, TICKER SYMBOL AND DIVIDEND INFORMATION

Market Price and Ticker Symbol

Common Shares and Warrants are currently listed on the Nasdaq under the symbols “ENGN” and “ENGNW,” respectively. The closing price of the Common Shares and Warrants on February 23, 2024 was $15.05 and $3.80, respectively.

Shareholders

As of February 22, 2024, there were approximately 43,373,451 Common Shares issued and outstanding held of record by 86 holders, and approximately 9,794,498 Warrants held of record by 24 holders, each exercisable for one Common Share at a price of $11.50 per share. Additionally, we agreed to issue the Lenders (as defined herein) Warrants to acquire up to 138,969 Common Shares, of which 62,413 have been issued. The actual number of holders of our Common Shares is greater than this number of record holders, and includes shareholders who are beneficial owners, but whose shares are held in street name by brokers or held by other nominees. This number of holders of record also does not include shareholders whose shares may be held in trust by other entities.

Such numbers do not include beneficial owners holding our securities through nominee names.

Dividend Policy

We have not paid any cash dividends on our Common Shares to date. The payment of cash dividends in the future will be dependent upon our revenues and earnings, if any, capital requirements and general financial condition. The payment of any cash dividends will be within the discretion of the board of directors at such time.

92

UNAUDITED PRO FORMA CONDENSED COMBINED FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Throughout this section, unless otherwise noted, “enGene” refers to enGene Inc. and its consolidated subsidiary.

The following unaudited pro forma condensed combined statement of operations for the year ended October 31, 2023 presents the combination of the financial information of FEAC, New enGene and enGene, after giving effect to the Transactions, including Business Combination, 2023 PIPE Financing, the Non-Redemption Agreement, the Convertible Bridge Financing, the Working Capital Loans, the FEAC Sponsor and Insiders Letter Agreement, and the Extension Loans and related adjustments described in the accompanying notes. Subsequent to the Business Combination, FEAC, New enGene and enGene are collectively referred to herein as the “Combined Company.” The Transactions are reflected in the Combined Company’s consolidated balance sheet as of October 31, 2023. Therefore, the unaudited pro forma condensed combined balance sheet is not presented in the following unaudited pro forma condensed combined financial information.

The unaudited pro forma condensed combined statement of operations does not give effect to the 2024 PIPE Financing, the Amended Loan Agreement entered into on December 22, 2023, or the February 2024 Cashless Warrant Exercises. For information with respect to the effect of those transactions on the Company’s capitalization, see “Capitalization.”

FEAC is a blank check company incorporated on August 9, 2021, as a Cayman Islands exempted company for the purpose of effecting a merger, share exchange, asset acquisition, share purchase, reorganization or similar business combination with one or more businesses or entities. Prior to executing the Business Combination Agreement, FEAC’s efforts were limited to organizational activities, completion of its IPO and the evaluation of possible business combinations. As of September 30, 2023, there was $138.8 million in investments and cash held in the Trust Account and $86,000 of cash held outside the Trust Account available for general corporate purposes.

enGene Inc., is a clinical-stage biotechnology company developing non-viral gene therapies based on localized delivery of nucleic acid payloads to mucosal tissues. enGene’s proprietary DDX platform has a high degree of payload flexibility, including DNA and various forms of RNA with broad tissue and disease application.

The unaudited pro forma condensed combined statement of operations for the year ended October 31, 2023 gives pro forma effect to the Transactions as if they had occurred on November 1, 2022, which is the beginning of the earliest period presented.

The unaudited pro forma condensed combined financial information are based on and should be read in conjunction with the historical financial statements of each of FEAC, New enGene, and enGene and the notes thereto, as well as the disclosures contained in the sections titled “FEAC’s Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” and “enGene’s Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included in this prospectus.

The unaudited pro forma condensed combined financial information has been presented for illustrative purposes only and does not necessarily reflect what the Combined Company’s results of operations would have been had the Transactions occurred on the date indicated, nor are they indicative of the future consolidated results of operations of the Combined Company. The actual results of operations may differ significantly from the pro forma amounts reflected herein due to a variety of factors. The unaudited pro forma adjustments represent management’s estimates based on information available as of the date of these unaudited pro forma condensed combined financial information and are subject to change as additional information becomes available and analyses are performed.

The Business Combination results in the combination of enGene and New enGene, with a fiscal year end of October 31, with FEAC, with a fiscal year end of December 31. The pro forma statement of operations for the

93

year ended October 31, 2023 presents the combination of financial information of New enGene, FEAC and enGene, after giving effect to the Transactions described in the accompanying notes. The unaudited pro forma statement of operations for the year ended October 31, 2023 includes New enGene’s consolidated results of operations for the year ended October 31, 2023 and FEAC’s results of operations for the twelve months ended September 30, 2023. New enGene’s consolidated results of operations for the year ended October 31, 2023 include the results of operations of enGene for the year ended October 31, 2023 and the results of operations of New enGene for the period from April 24, 2023 (inception) to October 31, 2023.

94

UNAUDITED PRO FORMA CONDENSED COMBINED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS

FOR THE YEAR ENDED OCTOBER 31, 2023

(In thousands, except share and per share amounts)

See accompanying notes to the unaudited pro forma condensed combined financial information.

95

NOTES TO UNAUDITED PRO FORMA CONDENSED COMBINED FINANCIAL INFORMATION

1. Description of the Transactions

On May 16, 2023, FEAC, enGene and New enGene entered into the Business Combination Agreement. Under the terms of the Business Combination Agreement, the business combination of FEAC, enGene, and New enGene was completed through a series of transactions including Business Combination, 2023 PIPE Financing, the Non-Redemption Agreement, the Convertible Bridge Financing, the Working Capital Loans, the FEAC Sponsor and Insiders Letter Agreement, and the Extension Loans. The principal steps of the Transactions are described below; please see “Summary of the Prospectus — Background and Business Combination” for a full description of the Transactions.

Pursuant to the Business Combination Agreement, two entities were incorporated to effect the Transactions, Can Merger Sub, a Canadian corporation and a wholly owned subsidiary of FEAC and Cayman Merger Sub, a Cayman Islands exempt company and a direct wholly owned subsidiary of New enGene.

2023 PIPE Financing

In connection with the Business Combination Agreement, FEAC and New enGene entered into the 2023 Subscription Agreements with the 2023 PIPE Investors, as modified by the Insiders Letter Agreement (as defined below), pursuant to which the 2023 PIPE Investors agreed to purchase FEAC Class A Shares and FEAC Warrants (or New enGene Shares and New enGene Warrants when such obligation was assumed (the “Assumption”) by New enGene) for an aggregate commitment amount of $56.9 million. The 2023 Subscription Agreements are subject to certain conditions, including, among other things, completing the steps of the Transactions. The purpose of the 2023 PIPE Financing is to fund general corporate expenses of New enGene.

Sponsor and Insiders Letter Agreement

Concurrent with the execution of the Business Combination Agreement, FEAC, the FEAC Sponsor, Forbion Growth Opportunities Fund I Cooperatief U.A. and the other holders of FEAC Class B Shares, enGene, New enGene and the other parties named therein (collectively, other than enGene and New enGene, the “FEAC Sponsor Parties”) entered into the Sponsor and Insiders Letter Agreement, pursuant to which the FEAC Sponsor agreed to surrender and in effect issue to 2023 PIPE Investors, after giving effect to the conversion of all or part of the principal amount outstanding under loans made by the FEAC Sponsor to FEAC into FEAC Private Placement Warrants, 1,789,004 FEAC Class B Shares and 5,463,381 FEAC Private Placement Warrants, effective immediately prior to the Class B Conversion on the day which is two business days prior to the Closing Date (the “Surrender”).

Non-Redemption Agreement

In connection with the execution of the Business Combination Agreement, FEAC and a FEAC shareholder that is the beneficial owner of 166,665 FEAC Class A Shares entered into a non-redemption agreement (the “Non-Redemption Agreement”), pursuant to which, FEAC agreed to issue additional FEAC Class A Shares and FEAC Warrants (which commitment was assumed by New enGene as part of the Transactions such that New enGene issued additional New enGene Shares and New enGene Warrants) to such FEAC shareholder in consideration of such FEAC shareholder’s commitment (i) to vote or cause to be voted all of its FEAC Shares in favor of the Transaction Proposals and (ii) not to redeem its FEAC Class A Shares in connection with the approval of the Business Combination by the shareholders of FEAC.

Convertible Bridge Financing

Prior to the execution and delivery of the Business Combination Agreement, enGene agreed to certain modifications of existing convertible indebtedness in an aggregate principal amount of $18.4 million (the “2022 Convertible Notes” and, together with the enGene warrants to be issued by enGene as consideration for such

96

modifications, the “Amended 2022 Financing”). On April 4, 2023, enGene entered into an interest-free debt agreement for aggregate cash proceeds of $8.0 million (the “2023 Subordinated Notes”). Concurrently with the execution and delivery of the Business Combination Agreement, enGene entered into agreements pursuant to which it issued new convertible indebtedness and enGene warrants (i) for cash in an aggregate principal amount of $30.0 million, which amount was funded in two tranches, comprising an initial $20.0 million on May 17, 2023 by Forbion Growth Sponsor FEAC I B.V. and a subsequent $10.0 million on June 15, 2023, and (ii) in repayment of the 2023 Subordinated Notes (such convertible notes, the “2023 Convertible Notes” and, together with the enGene warrants purchased concurrently, the “2023 Financing”; the 2023 Financing together with the Amended 2022 Financing, the “Convertible Bridge Financing”). The Convertible Bridge Financing indebtedness was converted in the Transactions into that number of enGene Common Shares that, when exchanged at the enGene Exchange Ratio, equal that number of FEAC Class A Shares (or after the Assumption, New enGene Shares) that the holders of such indebtedness would have received if they subscribed for FEAC Class A Shares (or after the Assumption, New enGene Shares) on the same terms as the 2023 PIPE Financing.

In relation to the Amended 2022 Financing, the holders of the 2022 Convertible Notes received warrants to purchase enGene Common Shares and the holders of the 2023 Convertible Notes were issued warrants in connection with the issuance of the 2023 Convertible Notes. These warrants converted through the Transactions to warrants to purchase common shares of the Combined Company. These warrants have substantially similar terms as the warrants received by the 2023 PIPE investors and were equity classified upon the execution of the 2023 PIPE Financing at the close of the Business Combination.

Working Capital Loans

On March 24, 2023, the FEAC Sponsor and FEAC entered into an unsecured promissory note (the “First Loan Note”) under which the FEAC Sponsor agreed to extend to FEAC a loan of up to $900,000, to be used for FEAC’s general corporate purposes. The FEAC Sponsor funded the initial principal amount of $450,000 on March 24, 2023, and additionally funded $450,000 on April 26, 2023. On June 6, 2023, the FEAC Sponsor and FEAC entered into an additional unsecured promissory note (the “Second Loan Note”) under which the FEAC Sponsor agreed to extend to FEAC a loan of up to $300,000, to be used for FEAC’s general corporate purposes. The FEAC Sponsor funded the principal amount of $300,000 under the Second Loan Note on June 6, 2023. Also, on September 13, 2023, the FEAC Sponsor and FEAC entered into an additional unsecured promissory note (the “Third Loan Note” and, together with the First Loan Note and the Second Loan Note, the “Working Capital Loan Notes”) under which the FEAC Sponsor agreed to extend to FEAC a loan of up to $450,000, to be used for FEAC’s general corporate purposes. The FEAC Sponsor funded the principal amount of $450,000 under the Third Loan Note on September 13, 2023. The Working Capital Loan Notes bore no interest and were due and payable on the earlier of (i) the date of consummation of a business combination and (ii) December 14, 2023. Upon consummation of the Business Combination, the FEAC Sponsor elected to convert the outstanding principal amount under the First Loan Note into 600,000 additional FEAC Private Placement Warrants at a price of $1.50 per warrant, and the remaining principal amount outstanding under the Second Loan Note and the Third Loan Note was repaid by FEAC out of the proceeds of the Trust Account released to FEAC.

Extension Loans

On June 6, 2023, FEAC extended the period of time to consummate a business combination which required the FEAC Sponsor or its affiliates or designees to deposit into the Trust Account, $1.3 million ($0.10 per FEAC Class A Shares in either case) (the “First Extension Loan Note”).

On September 13, 2023, FEAC further extended the period of time to consummate a business combination which required the FEAC Sponsor to deposit into the Trust Account $1.3 million ($0.10 per FEAC Class A Share). The payment was made in the form of a non-interest bearing, unsecured promissory note (the “Second Extension Loan Note” and, together with the First Extension Loan Note, the “Extension Notes”). The Extension Notes bear no interest and were due and payable on the earlier of (i) the date of consummation of a business

97

combination and (ii) December 14, 2023. Upon consummation of the Business Combination, the FEAC Sponsor elected to convert $600,000 of the principal amount outstanding under the First Extension Loan Note into 400,000 additional FEAC Private Placement Warrants at a price of $1.50 per warrant, and the remaining principal amount outstanding under the First Extension Loan Note and the amount outstanding under the Second Extension Loan Note were repaid by FEAC out of the proceeds of the Trust Account released to FEAC.

These additional FEAC Private Placement Warrants were issued by FEAC to the FEAC Sponsor immediately prior to the Surrender on the day which was two business days prior to the Closing Date, in accordance with the FEAC Warrant Agreement and the relevant promissory note governing the First Loan Note and/or the First Extension Loan Note, as applicable.

2. Basis of Pro Forma Presentation

The unaudited pro forma condensed combined financial information were prepared in accordance with Article 11 of SEC Regulation S-X, as amended by the final rule, Release No. 33-10786, Amendments to Financial Disclosures about Acquired and Disposed Businesses. Release No. 33-10786 replaced the previous pro forma adjustment criteria with simplified requirements to depict the accounting for business combinations (“Transaction Accounting Adjustments”) and permitted the presentation of reasonably estimable synergies and other transaction effects that have occurred or are reasonably expected to occur (“Management’s Adjustments”). Management of enGene and FEAC (collectively “Management”) has elected not to present Management’s Adjustments and only presents Transaction Accounting Adjustments in the unaudited pro forma condensed combined financial information. The transaction accounting adjustments presented in the pro forma financial information are made to provide relevant information necessary for an understanding of the Combined Company reflecting the accounting for the Business Combination, the 2023 PIPE Financing, the Non-Redemption Agreement, the Convertible Bridge Financing, the Working Capital Loans, the Sponsor and Insiders Letter Agreement, and the Extension Loans.

The unaudited pro forma condensed combined financial information is based on the FEAC historical financial statements and the New enGene historical consolidated financial statements as adjusted to give effect to the Transactions. The unaudited pro forma condensed combined statement of operations for the year ended October 31, 2023 gives effect to the Transactions as if they had occurred on November 1, 2022.

The Business Combination results in the combination of enGene and New enGene, with a fiscal year end of October 31, with FEAC, with a fiscal year end of December 31. The pro forma statement of operations for the year ended October 31, 2023 present the combination of financial information of New enGene, FEAC and enGene, after giving effect to the Business Combination and related adjustments described in the accompanying notes. The unaudited pro forma statement of operations for the year ended October 31, 2023 includes New enGene’s statement of operations for the year ended October 31, 2023 and FEAC’s results of operations for the twelve months ended September 30, 2023. New enGene’s consolidated statement of operations for the year ended October 31, 2023 includes the results of operations of enGene for the year ended October 31, 2023 and the results of operations of New enGene for the period from April 24, 2023 (inception) to October 31, 2023.

Management has made significant estimates and assumptions in its determination of the pro forma adjustments. The pro forma adjustments reflecting the Transactions are based on certain currently available information and certain assumptions and methodologies that Management believes are reasonable under the circumstances. The pro forma adjustments, which are described in the accompanying notes, may be revised as additional information becomes available and is evaluated. Therefore, it is possible that the actual adjustments will differ from the pro forma adjustments, and it is possible the difference may be material. Management believes that its assumptions and methodologies provide a reasonable basis for presenting all of the significant effects of the Transactions based on information available at this time and that the pro forma adjustments give appropriate effect to those assumptions and are properly applied in the unaudited pro forma condensed combined financial statements.

98

The unaudited pro forma condensed combined financial information do not give effect to any operating efficiencies or cost savings that may be associated with the Business Combination. FEAC and enGene have not had any historical relationship prior to the Business Combination, with the exception of a shareholder investment in enGene by Forbion Capital Fund III, an affiliate of the FEAC Sponsor. Accordingly, no pro forma adjustments were required to eliminate activities between the companies.

As a result of the Transactions, enGene shareholders (including shares owned by Forbion Capital Fund III, an existing enGene shareholder) own approximately 42% of the shares of New enGene Shares, FEAC public shareholders (excluding FEAC Sponsor shares) own approximately 1% of the shares of New enGene Shares, the FEAC Sponsor and FGOF together own approximately 25% of the shares of New enGene Shares, and 2023 PIPE investors (excluding FEAC Sponsor portion) own approximately 32% of the shares of New enGene Shares. At Closing, shares outstanding of New enGene as presented in the unaudited pro forma condensed combined financial information include the following:

The Business Combination Agreement and the Plan of Arrangement together provide that all outstanding enGene Shares were exchanged directly for New enGene Shares in the Business Combination (without prior conversion into enGene Common Shares) at the enGene Exchange Ratio. Solely for ease of presentation and understanding, the unaudited pro forma adjustments presented below assumes that all enGene Non-Voting Common Shares and the enGene Preferred Shares are first converted into enGene Common Shares prior to the exchange of such shares in the Business Combination for New enGene Shares, which assumption has no impact on the Combined Company Pro Forma Statement of Operations.

These unaudited pro forma condensed combined financial information and related notes have been derived from and should be read in conjunction with:

99

The unaudited pro forma condensed combined financial information are provided for illustrative purposes only and are not necessarily indicative of what the actual results of operations would have been had the Transactions taken place on the dates indicated, nor are they indicative of the future consolidated results of operations of the Combined Company.

3. Accounting for the Business Combination

Notwithstanding the legal form, the Business Combination is accounted for as a reverse recapitalization in accordance with US GAAP. Under this method of accounting, FEAC is treated as the acquired company for financial reporting purposes, whereas enGene is treated as the accounting acquirer. In accordance with this accounting method, New enGene is considered to be a continuation of enGene, with the net identifiable assets of FEAC deemed to have been acquired by enGene in exchange for enGene Common Shares accompanied by a recapitalization. The net assets of FEAC are stated at historical cost, with no goodwill or other intangible assets recorded, and operations prior to the Business Combination are those of enGene. enGene has been determined to be the accounting acquirer based on an evaluation of the following facts and circumstances, and accordingly the Business Combination is treated as an equivalent to an acquisition of FEAC accompanied by a recapitalization.

4. Common shares of enGene Inc.

The enGene Exchange Ratio is calculated in accordance with the terms of the Business Combination Agreement as a quotient obtained by dividing the enGene Per Share Value by the Reference Price of $10.25. The enGene Per Share Value is determined as (i) $96,543,554, which is the reference value of $90,000,000 plus the exercise value of enGene Inc.’s outstanding share-based awards, divided by (ii) 52,187,971, which is the sum of enGene’s outstanding common shares immediately prior to the closing of the Business Combination and the number of common shares issued or issuable upon exercise or settlement of enGene Inc.’s outstanding share based awards and excludes any shares issuable for the conversion of enGene Inc.’s convertible debt. The defined terms are presented in full in the Business Combination Agreement and included elsewhere in this prospectus.

100

5. Adjustments to Unaudited Pro Forma Condensed Combined Statement of Operations

The pro forma notes and adjustments, based on preliminary estimates that could change materially as additional information is obtained, are as follows:

Pro forma notes:

101

enGene and FEAC are both non-taxable entities and no pro forma adjustments have an impact on associated income tax.

Pro forma Transaction Accounting Adjustments:

102

103

BUSINESS OF ENGENE

On October 31, 2023 (the “Closing Date”), enGene Holdings Inc. consummated the previously announced business combination (the “Reverse Recapitalization”) with Forbion European Acquisition Corp., a Cayman Islands exempted company and a special purpose acquisition corporation, and enGene Inc., a corporation incorporated under the laws of Canada, pursuant to the Business Combination Agreement, dated as of May 16, 2023 (as amended, the “Merger Agreement”). Throughout this section, unless otherwise noted, “we,” “us,” “our” and similar words refer to, for periods prior to the Closing Date, enGene Inc. and its subsidiary, and for periods following the Closing Date, to enGene Holdings Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries.

Overview

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company focused on developing gene therapies to improve the lives of patients. We are developing non-viral gene therapies based on our novel and proprietary dually derived chitosan, or “DDX”, gene delivery platform, which allows localized delivery of multiple gene cargos directly to mucosal tissues and other organs. We believe our DDX platform, with its broad tissue and disease application, has the potential to take gene therapy beyond rare genetic diseases into oncology and other underserved therapeutic areas. We have established integrated capabilities with this platform to support the clinical development and potential commercialization of our gene therapies.

Our lead product candidate, detalimogene voraplasmid, or “EG-70,” which is comprised of three gene cargos delivered via our proprietary DDX platform, is a therapy designed to generate a local immune reaction in proximity to tumors. We believe this enables the immune system to reduce or clear the tumor and develop memory to resist recurrence. Because this treatment does not need to deliver the therapeutic gene directly into tumor cells, it is applicable to many tumor types. We are currently developing EG-70 as a monotherapy to treat non-muscle invasive bladder cancer (“NMIBC”) with carcinoma in situ (“Cis”) in patients that have been unresponsive to treatment with Bacillus Calmette-Guerin, or “BCG,” or what is referred to as “BCG-unresponsive NMIBC with Cis.”

In NMIBC, carcinoma in situ, or Cis, is a flat, high-grade, sessile tumor that has a high likelihood of invading the deeper layers of the bladder wall. A “high-” or “low-” tumor risk describes the degree to which the tumor pathology appears more likely to grow quickly and invade non-cancerous tissue. NMIBC with Cis is typically initially treated with a solution containing the bacterium BCG that is instilled into the bladder multiple times over the course of several months. Despite this treatment, many of these cancers recur and are unresponsive to additional BCG, allowing the cancer to spread throughout and deeper into the bladder and often requiring surgical removal of the bladder (radical cystectomy). We believe BCG-unresponsive NMIBC with Cis is currently an underserved therapeutic segment with limited treatment options, and that there is a market opportunity for EG-70 as a monotherapy for this condition. While the potential market for EG-70 may not be limited to these patients, that is our current initial focus in working to bring EG-70 to market.

We estimate there are approximately 60,000 new patients globally each year with BCG-unresponsive NMIBC, of which up to 70% have Cis at the time of diagnosis of BCG-unresponsiveness. We derived this estimate from the overall global bladder cancer incidence of 550,000 patients per year, estimating the percentage of such patients with NMIBC, and further estimating the percentage of such patients who later develop BCG- unresponsiveness. See “— Product and Pipeline Development — Lead Program: NMIBC Background and Unmet Need.”

EG-70 program is enrolling patients in a combined Phase 1/2 open label registrational study, referred to as “LEGEND” (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04752722). In addition, our preclinical research is focused on expanding the cancer indications that can be treated with EG-70. We are also in early stages of developing a second product candidate referred to as EG-i08 for treatment of Cystic Fibrosis.

104

Our Competitive Strengths

105

Our Strategy

106

Our Gene Therapy Platform for Mucosal Tissues

Historically, gene therapy has been hampered by several significant challenges associated with the use of viral vectors as gene delivery vehicles.

We believe our proprietary DDX platform can overcome these limitations of traditional viral gene delivery platforms. As described in more detail below, unlike viral vectors, we believe the delivery vehicle we have developed is:

107

Mucosal tissues such as the bladder, lungs, and gut, comprise a vast surface area across the human body. Their relative ease of accessibility makes these tissues attractive targets for modalities that have the potential to be locally targeted such as tissue-localized gene therapy. In spite of these properties, gene therapies have struggled in mucosal tissues, as the biological barrier function of the tissues has rendered them an inhospitable environment to most drug products or gene delivery modalities. Thus, although gene therapy has revolutionized other fields of medicine, it has left behind many patients suffering from illnesses that manifest in mucosal tissues.

enGene was founded to seek to address these underserved patients with novel genetic medicines. Our DDX platform allows non-viral gene therapies to be dosed directly into the lumen of the targeted mucosal tissue. Once inside the lumiral cavity, the DDX nanoparticles transport nucleic acid medicines (DNA or RNA) into the mucosal epithelial cells. For example, the transported genetic medicines can encode for proteins, peptides, antibodies, and other non-coding RNA molecules.

Product and Pipeline Development

Our lead product candidate program is EG-70 (detalimogene voraplasmid), which we are developing as a monotherapy for the treatment of BCG-unresponsive NMIBC with Cis. This lead program is currently enrolling in a combined Phase 1/2 open label registrational study, “LEGEND” (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04752722), the data from which we will incorporate in a Biologics License Application to be submitted at the conclusion of the Phase 2 portion of the trial. This trial also includes a BCG-treatment naïve arm to assess EG-70 as a potential first-line therapeutic for high-risk NMIBC. We currently expect to make an additional Investigational New Drug application (“IND”) in 2024 for the application of EG-70 to an additional as-yet unnamed indication, most likely in the gynecological or genitourinary cancer space. Until such time as we finalize and announce this second indication, it will be difficult to forecast or predict further clinical development timelines, as we expect they will be determined by the ultimate indication we elect to pursue.

A second product candidate, EG-i08, is in preclinical development for cystic fibrosis, with development candidate nomination expected in 2024 subject to a multifactor go/no-go assessment involving technical review and assessment of grant support availability. As above, given the early stage of this program, it will be difficult to forecast or predict further clinical development timelines at this time.

108

The following chart shows the current status of our product development to the extent we can estimate key actions and milestones at this time:

EG-70 (detalimogene voraplasmid): Immuno-oncology

Mechanism of action

Our EG-70 drug product candidate comprises nanoparticles, with a DNA nanoplasmid encapsulated by a non-viral, DDX polymer-based delivery vehicle. The DDX delivery vehicle consists of a highly derivatized chitosan backbone and includes reversible PEGylation (where PEG stands for polyethylene glycol) to facilitate diffusion through protective epithelial shields, such as mucous in the lung and the GAG (glycosaminoglycan) layer in the bladder.

109

The EG-70 drug substance plasmid DNA encodes multiple open reading frames expressing three distinct transcripts: a single-chain interleukin-12 protein (IL-12) and two non-protein coding RNA products, eRNA11a and VA1, which coordinate to stimulate the retinoic acid-inducible gene I (RIG-I) pathway. Together, this combination of RIG-I activation and IL-12 secretion serves to activate both innate and adaptive immunity, creating a pro-inflammatory, tumor-killing environment:

RIG-I is expressed in most cell types and highly expressed in epithelial cells. It is also expressed in tumor cells and recognizes double stranded RNA molecules with an uncapped 5´ triphosphate (5´PPP) or 5´ diphosphate (5´PP) end to initiate a signaling cascade that results in the production of Type I interferons (IFN) and proinflammatory cytokines. The activation of RIG-I stimulates a potent inflammatory response that results in direct tumor cell killing, cytokine-mediated activation of innate immune cells, and the recruitment and cross-priming of T cells. IL-12 is an immunomodulatory cytokine primarily produced by antigen presenting cells, such as dendritic cells (DCs) and macrophages, following bacterial or viral infection. Signaling through the IL-12 receptor complex, expressed on natural killer (NK), NK-T, and activated effector CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, enhances the cytotoxicity of effector cells and results in T cell proliferation, polarization to a type 1 helper (Th1) phenotype, and interferon-gamma (IFNg) production. The production of IFNg is central to the potent anti-tumor and anti-angiogenic functions of IL-12. In summary, the activation of RIG-I is intended to induce an innate immune response that will trigger T cell recruitment and cross-presentation of tumor antigens to T cells through induction of mediators such as C-X-C motif chemokine ligand 10 (CXCL10) and Type I IFNs, respectively. The expression of IL-12 protein is intended to augment the anti-tumor activity of indwelling effector T cells.

110

Together, RIG-I agonism and IL-12 receptor stimulation function in a two-step mechanism to recruit and activate immune cells to the tumor microenvironment (“TME”).

Clinical trials using systemic or subcutaneous administration of IL-12 to treat various solid malignancies have resulted in severe dose-limiting toxicities, resulting in a marginal therapeutic window. In contrast, local delivery of IL-12 has emerged as a clinical strategy to enhance immunological activity within the TME, promote systemic immunity, and minimize systemic toxicity. Using preclinical models, we have demonstrated a therapeutic benefit of co-expression of RIG-I activators and IL-12 in bladder urothelium to localize therapeutic effect and exposure within the bladder TME without systemic toxicity. We believe these clinical trials demonstrated that coupling the potent stimulation of the innate immune system by RIG-I agonism to stimulation of the adaptive immune response by IL-12 provides robust and persistent anti-tumor activity in a murine orthotopic bladder cancer model. Moreover, we also demonstrate translatable expression across multiple species, including humans.

Lead Program: NMIBC Background and Unmet Need

Disease Background

Bladder cancer represents a serious, life-threatening condition. Based on data reported through 2020, bladder cancer is expected to result in an estimated 2.7% of all cancer deaths in 2023 while comprising an estimated 4.2% of all new cancer cases according to the National Institute of Health. Overall, according to the American Cancer Society and the National Institute of Health, the chance men will develop this cancer during their life is about 1 in 28; and for women, the chance is about 1 in 91.

Fortunately, due to early warning signals such as hematuria, many instances of bladder cancer are diagnosed while still localized to the bladder urothelium, and these NMIBCs represent approximately 80% of newly diagnosed bladder tumors.

Unmet Medical Need

Since NMIBC is often diagnosed early, it can be treated in its early stage to prevent invasive therapy or organ removal. The initial treatment plan for these patients involves local therapy to the inside of the bladder to treat the disease before it can become invasive, while limiting systemic side effects. Since the 1970s, the primary therapy for high-risk NMIBC has been intravesical BCG therapy, despite the adverse effects with which it is associated and a >50% failure rate. Due to the increased use of BCG in this setting and loss of several manufacturers of BCG, supply constraints have resulted in a shortage of the BCG for commercial use. To manage the limited supply available in the United States, as of February 2019 the American Urological Association and their collaborative physician groups revised their treatment guidelines to recommend that BCG should be prioritized for patients with high-risk disease and they should receive full-strength BCG induction, but subsequent maintenance doses could be one-half to one-third the standard dose. This situation is projected to continue into 2026 and has brought urgency to the unmet medical need for effective intravesical treatments for patients with high grade NMIBC, according to the American Urological Association.

In general, while most patients are free of recurrence at 1 year with induction and maintenance full-dose BCG, as many as 75% develop a new tumor in 5 years and unfortunately a second course of BCG is unlikely to provide further benefit. This population represents a population of patients with a profound medical need to keep their cancer from becoming invasive while being able to preserve their bladders. In addition, patients receiving local salvage therapy for NMIBC with Cis who failed BCG induction and maintenance generally do not respond to more BCG, or to other intravesical chemotherapy agents.

We estimate there are approximately 60,000 new patients globally each year with BCG-unresponsive NMIBC, of which up to 70% have Cis at the time of diagnosis of BCG-unresponsiveness. We derived this

111

estimate from the overall global bladder cancer incidence of 550,000 patients per year, estimating the percentage of such patients with NMIBC, and further estimating the percentage of such patients who later develop BCG-unresponsiveness. At the anticipated time of EG-70’s BLA application in the first quarter of 2026, we estimate that there will be approximately 9,800 new NMIBC patients with BCG-unresponsive NMIBC in the United States per year, of which up to 70% will have Cis at time of diagnosis. Outside of the United States, we believe the market will be comparable on a population-adjusted basis, although per-capita bladder cancer incidence has been known to vary across countries. Of note, these are only our current estimates and have been derived from a variety of sources, including scientific literature, input from key opinion leaders, patient foundations or secondary market research databases and may prove to be incorrect. For individuals with BCG-unresponsive NMIBC with Cis, treatment options are currently quite limited. In the case of papillary bladder tumors, a frequent precursor condition to BCG-unresponsive NMIBC with Cis, gemcitabine and mitomycin are given as a single-dose of intravesical chemotherapy shortly after surgical removal of the tumor to reduce the recurrence rate; however, they are not FDA-approved to be used for NMIBC with Cis. VALSTAR^® (valrubicin) was approved by the FDA for salvage therapy in BCG-unresponsive NMIBC patients with Cis, but is not recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) in their guidelines due to the low CR rate.

The FDA approval of Keytruda^® (pembrolizumab) in 2020 for the treatment of patients with BCG- unresponsive NMIBC with Cis (with or without papillary tumors) provided a systemic, intravenous option for therapy. However, we believe the adverse event profile of Keytruda combined with its relatively limited durability and its systemic route of administration, typically by medical oncologists rather than urology clinics, may limit its widespread adoption as a treatment option.

Adstiladrin^® (nadofaragene firadenovec-vncg) was recently approved by the FDA for patients with BCG-unresponsive NMIBC with Cis. However, Adstiladrin^® has faced manufacturing challenges which limited its availability at its product launch.

In summary, despite these recent FDA approvals, for patients with BCG-unresponsive NMIBC, treatment options are limited, and so the standard therapy has been radical cystectomy, which is associated with significant complications, including a lower quality of life, and risk of death. Therefore, we believe the development and discovery of new treatment options for BCG-unresponsive NMIBC with Cis is still a high priority to decrease the morbidity, burden of health-care expenditures, and mortality related to bladder cancer.

In response to this urgent unmet medical need due to the lack of treatment options and BGC shortage, the FDA has issued guidance for the design of clinical studies for development of novel NMIBC treatments, with a goal of encouraging development of alternative treatments to radical cystectomy. We have followed this guidance and discussed with the FDA our EG-70 development plan, and subsequent to these discussion, the FDA cleared us to initiate the pivotal, Phase 2 portion of the LEGEND study. We believe EG-70 has the potential to serve as a safe and effective immuno-oncology therapy to directly address this unmet need. We are encouraged by these results; however, the Phase 1 portion of this study was designed to evaluate safety and was not designed to evaluate efficacy in a statistically meaningful way.

112

LEGEND: A Phase 1/2 Study of EG-70 in NMIBC

Study Design

LEGEND is a Phase 1/2, open-label, multicenter, safety and dose-finding study conducted in the United States and initiated in February 2021 to determine the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of EG-70 in adult patients with NMIBC with Cis who have failed BCG therapy and are recommended for radical cystectomy, or high-risk NMIBC patients with Cis who are BCG-naïve or have received incomplete BCG treatment. The study consists of two phases, beginning with a Dose-Escalation Phase (Phase 1). The key objective for the Phase 1 portion of the study is evaluation of safety and tolerability. While not statistically powered for efficacy, an evaluation of efficacy was a secondary objective, with a Phase 2 study to be conducted at the RP2D. Eligible BCG-unresponsive NMIBC patients with Cis have been enrolled in Phase 1 and will continue to be enrolled in Cohort 1 of Phase 2, which has already begun. Eligible high-risk NMIBC patients with Cis who have been incompletely treated or are BCG-naïve will be enrolled starting in Phase 2 in a separate single-arm cohort (Cohort 2). The schema, with key design features, for the cohorts that are unresponsive to BCG is defined below.

All patients in Phase 1 received at least one cycle of treatment with EG-70. A cycle is 12 weeks in duration. Those patients who have complete response or stable disease (SD) at the end of Cycle 1 (Week 10) may (in association and consultation with their physician) choose to continue receiving treatment for up to a total of 4 cycles, provided they do not have progressive disease (PD) on evaluation for response at the end of each cycle. Patients who complete cycle 1 and the additional 3 cycles without PD are followed until PD or for approximately 2 years following their End-of-Treatment Visit, whichever occurs first.

Study Endpoints

The primary endpoint of the Phase 1 study is safety (i.e., characterizing the nature, incidence, relatedness and severity of all observed adverse events (“AEs”) and severe adverse events (“SAEs”)), with complete response and pharmacodynamics of biomarkers assessed as exploratory endpoints.

113

Result: Safety

Twenty-four patients have received at least one dose of EG-70 in the Phase 1 study, with the total number of AEs and most commonly reported AEs across all 24 patients defined in the table below. The majority (97%) of AEs have been Grade 1 or 2 and largely consistent with the same events seen with instrumentation, catheterization, and intravesical instillation of any agent. Four Grade 3 SAEs have been observed in Phase 1. However, on review, it was observed that the renal failure was present at baseline before treatment with EG-70. The other three Grade 3 SAEs were considered unrelated to the study drug. There was no association between the severity or incidence of AEs and the dose level. In addition, AEs were not more frequent or severe later cycles of dosing. The following table summarizes the Phase 1 safety results.

114

Results: Efficacy

Efficacy was assessed by the standard three criteria evaluation used for NMIBC, namely urinary cytology, cystoscopic appearance (i.e., an inspection with a cystoscope—a thin tube with video camera that is inserted into the bladder), and biopsy results of suspicious areas. Biopsies in the former area of Cis were required even if the appearance was normal. In Phase 1, patients without progressive disease were allowed to electively continue on study drug after the 3-month visit. In total, 22 patients were dosed with the study drug and evaluable for efficacy at the 3-month visit. One patient included in evaluations for safety evaluation was excluded from efficacy, see the footnote to the table below.

The plot below captures individual subjects in each row, organized chronologically from the first patient enrolled (#1) to the last enrolled in Phase 1 (#22). The dose group is captured on the left-hand side of the plot, with DL1, DL2, DL3 reflecting half-log increments in amount of plasmid DNA instilled, as dose. Each of these three regimens reflects delivery of a dose on Weeks 1 and 2 of each 3-month cycle, whereas the ‘prime’ dosing schedule indicated as DL2’ reflects 4 instillations of EG-70 in each 3-month cycle, namely at Weeks 1, 2, 5, and 6. Expansion cohorts after safety had been demonstrated in the initial cohort of 3 patients is indicated by the suffix ‘E’. Overall, across all doses, 16 of 22 patients dosed with EG-70 achieved a Complete Response, or “CR,” for a best overall CR rate of 73%. Specifically, at the 3-month timepoint, this CR rate was 68% (15 of 22), with 82% (18 of 22) of patients continuing to receive additional doses of the study drug beyond 3 months. Within the dose selected for the pivotal portion of the study (DL2’), the CR rate at 3 and 6 months was 70% and 60%, respectively, with 90% of patients continuing on the study drug beyond 3 months. Of note, patient #1 has maintained a CR for 18 months after the first dose of EG-70.