Aktis Oncology, Inc. (AKTS) Risk Analysis

We have received fast track designation for [225Ac]Ac-AKY-1189 for the treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic UC who had progressed on or after prior systemic therapies and may seek fast track designation for certain of our other product candidates. If a drug is intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening condition and nonclinical or clinical data for the drug demonstrates the potential to address an unmet medical need for such a condition, the drug sponsor may apply for fast track designation. The FDA has broad discretion whether or not to grant this designation, so even if we believe a particular product candidate is eligible for this designation, we cannot assure you that the FDA would decide to grant it for any of our other product candidates. Even with fast track designation, we may not experience a faster development process, review or approval compared to conventional FDA procedures. The FDA may withdraw fast track designation if it believes that the designation is no longer supported by data from our clinical development program. Fast track designation alone does not guarantee qualification for the FDA's priority review procedures. A breakthrough therapy is defined as a drug that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. For product candidates that have been designated as breakthrough therapies, interaction and communication between the FDA and the sponsor of the trial can help to identify the most efficient path for clinical development while minimizing the number of patients placed in ineffective control regimens. Product candidates designated as breakthrough therapies by the FDA may also be eligible for priority review and accelerated approval. Designation as a breakthrough therapy is within the discretion of the FDA. Accordingly, even if we believe one of our future product candidates meets the criteria for designation as a breakthrough therapy, the FDA may disagree and instead determine not to make such designation. In any event, the receipt of a breakthrough therapy designation for a product candidate may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to therapies considered for approval under conventional FDA procedures and does not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, even if one or more of our product candidates qualify as breakthrough therapies, the FDA may later decide that such product candidates no longer meet the conditions for qualification or decide that the time period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened. 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, the FDA may designate the product candidate for priority review. A priority review designation means that the goal for the FDA to review an application is six months, rather than the standard review period of ten months. We may request priority review for our product candidates. The FDA has broad discretion with respect to whether or not to grant priority review status to a product candidate, so even if we believe 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 an 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.

As part of our business strategy, we may seek orphan drug designation for the product candidates we develop, and we may be unsuccessful. Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the United States and Europe, may designate drugs and biologics for relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs. Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a drug or biologic as an orphan drug if it is a drug or biologic intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals annually in the United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 in the United States where there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug or biologic will be recovered from sales in the United States. In the United States, orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax advantages and user-fee waivers. Similarly, in Europe, the European Commission grants orphan drug designation after receiving the opinion of the EMA Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products on an orphan drug designation application. Orphan drug designation is intended to promote the development of drugs and biologics that are intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of life-threatening or chronically debilitating conditions affecting not more than five in 10,000 persons in Europe and for which no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment has been authorized (or the product would be a significant benefit to those affected). Additionally, designation is granted for drugs and biologics intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life-threatening, seriously debilitating or serious and chronic condition and when, without incentives, it is unlikely that sales of the drug or biologic in Europe would be sufficient to justify the necessary investment in developing the drug or biologic. In Europe, orphan drug designation entitles a party to a number of incentives, such as protocol assistance and scientific advice specifically for designated orphan medicines, and potential fee reductions depending on the status of the sponsor. Generally, if a drug or biologic with an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first marketing approval for the indication for which it has such designation, the drug or biologic is entitled to a period of marketing exclusivity, which precludes the EMA, or the FDA from approving another marketing application for the same drug and for the same indication during the period of exclusivity, except in limited circumstances. The applicable period is seven years in the United States and 10 years in Europe. The European exclusivity period can be reduced to six years if a drug or biologic no longer meets the criteria for orphan drug designation or if the drug or biologic is sufficiently profitable such that market exclusivity is no longer justified. Even if we obtain orphan drug exclusivity for a product candidate, that exclusivity may not effectively protect such product candidate from competition because different therapies can be approved for the same condition and the same therapies can be approved for different conditions but used off-label. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA can subsequently approve the same drug for the same condition if the FDA concludes that the later drug or biologic is clinically superior in that it is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care. In addition, a designated orphan drug may not receive orphan drug exclusivity if it is approved for a use that is broader than the indication for which it received orphan designation. Moreover, orphan drug exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantity of the drug or biologic to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug or biologic nor gives the drug or biologic any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process. While we may seek orphan drug designation for applicable indications for our current and any future product candidates, we may never receive such designations. Even if we do receive such designation, there is no guarantee that we will enjoy the benefits of that designation.

From time to time, we may publicly disclose interim, topline, or preliminary data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials, which is based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following a more comprehensive review of the data related to the study or trial. Preliminary or interim data from clinical trials are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data becomes 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 evaluate all data fully and carefully. Further, modifications or improvements to our manufacturing processes for a therapy may result in changes to the characteristics or behavior of the product candidate that could cause our future product candidates to perform differently and affect the results of our ongoing clinical trials. As a result, other current or the topline results that we report may differ from future results of the same preclinical studies or clinical trials, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such topline results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. Topline data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result, topline data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available.

Success in preclinical studies does not ensure that later preclinical studies or clinical trials will be successful. Several companies in the biotechnology industry have suffered significant setbacks in clinical trials, even after positive results in preclinical and earlier clinical trials. These setbacks have been caused by, among other things, negative preclinical findings identified after clinical trials have already commenced and safety or efficacy observations made in clinical trials, including previously unanticipated adverse events. We cannot predict if the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority will consider the data from our future preclinical studies sufficient to support approval of an IND application or similar application. In addition, preclinical data is often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, which could require us to repeat or conduct additional preclinical studies. Notwithstanding any potential promising results in earlier studies, we cannot be certain that we will not face similar setbacks. In addition, the results of our preclinical animal studies, may not be predictive of the results of outcomes in subsequent clinical trials on human subjects. Product candidates in clinical trials may fail to show the desired pharmacological properties or safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through preclinical studies. The dosimetry assessments conducted using radioconjugates of our product candidates used may not be predictive of the anticancer effect or safety profile of our product candidates and we have had limited control and input over the conduct of this assessment and the reported results. The ability of our miniproteins to localize on tumors does not ensure that our product candidates will be successful at eradicating the tumor with an acceptable risk and safety profile, if at all. Likewise, the results of any early-stage clinical trials may not be predictive of the results of the later-stage clinical trials, which tend to enroll substantially larger numbers of patients. The preliminary results of clinical trials with smaller sample sizes can be disproportionately influenced by various biases associated with the conduct of small clinical trials, such as the potential failure of the smaller sample size to accurately depict the features of the broader patient population, which limits the ability to generalize the results across a broader community, thus making the clinical trial results less reliable than clinical trials with a larger number of patients. We plan to enroll larger patient populations in later trials of [225Ac]Ac-AKY-1189. With significantly more patients in future phases of the trial, we may not achieve statistically significant results or the same level of statistical significance, if any, that are observed in any earlier trials. 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. In addition, results in one indication may also not be predictive of results to be expected for the same product candidate in another indication. If we fail to receive positive results in preclinical studies or early-stage clinical trials, or those results are not replicated in later-stage clinical trials of any product candidate or across indications for that product candidate, the development timeline and regulatory approval and commercialization prospects for that product candidate, and, correspondingly, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects, would be harmed. The administration of AKY-1189 to patients in South Africa pursuant to Section 21 of the Medicines and Related Substances Act, or MRSA, as authorized by the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority, or SAPHRA, was conducted by a third-party physician. We had limited control and input with respect to the collection of the data from the patients in South Africa conducted pursuant to Section 21 of the MRSA and the manner in which it was conducted and will have limited control with respect to the human imaging data being gathered pursuant to Section 21 of the MSRA. We have relied on the results of the assessment to inform our development of [225Ac]Ac-AKY-1189, and these results may turn out to be incorrect or unreliable. Similarly, we will be relying on the investigator to conduct the human imaging studies in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards, and accurately report the results and correctly collect the data. If these results prove to be unreliable, the development of [225Ac]Ac-AKY-1189 may be adversely affected.

As with most biological products, use of our product candidates could be associated with undesirable side effects or adverse events which can vary in severity from minor reactions to death and in frequency from infrequent to prevalent. Undesirable side effects or unacceptable toxicities caused by our product candidates could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay, or halt clinical trials. Treatment-related undesirable side effects or adverse events could also affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled subjects to complete the trial, or could result in potential product liability claims. In addition, these side effects may not be appropriately or timely recognized or managed by the treating medical staff, particularly outside of the research institutions that collaborate with us. We have, and will need to continue to, educate and train medical personnel using our product candidates to understand their side effect profiles, for our ongoing Phase 1b clinical trial of [225Ac]Ac-AKY-1189 and any future clinical trials, and upon any commercialization of any product candidates. Inadequate training in recognizing or managing the potential side effects of our product candidates could result in adverse events to patients, including death. Any of these occurrences may materially and adversely harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Clinical trials of our product candidates must be conducted in carefully defined subsets of patients who have agreed to enter into clinical trials. Consequently, it is possible that our clinical trials, or those of any potential future collaborator, may indicate an apparent positive effect of a product candidate that is greater than the actual positive effect, if any, or alternatively fail to identify undesirable side effects. If one or more of our product candidates receives marketing approval and we, or others, discover that it is less effective than previously believed or causes undesirable side effects that were not previously identified, including during any long-term follow-up observation period recommended or required for patients who receive treatment using our products, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including: - regulatory authorities may withdraw approvals of such product, seize the product, or seek an injunction against its manufacture or distribution;- we, or any future collaborators, may be required to recall the product, change the way such product is administered to patients or conduct additional clinical trials;- additional restrictions may be imposed on the marketing of, or the manufacturing processes for, the particular product;- regulatory authorities may require additional warnings on the label, such as a "black box" warning or a contraindication, or impose distribution or use restrictions;- we, or any future collaborators, may be required to create a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, or REMS, which could include a medication guide outlining the risks of such side effects for distribution to patients, a communication plan for healthcare providers, and/or other elements to assure safe use;- we, or any future collaborators, may be subject to fines, injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties;- we, or any future collaborators, could be sued and held liable for harm caused to patients;- the product may become less competitive; and - our reputation may suffer. Any of the foregoing could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the particular product candidate, if approved, and could significantly harm our business, results of operations, and prospects, and could adversely impact our financial condition, results of operations or the market price of our common shares.

Our future success depends on leveraging our miniprotein radioconjugate platform to successfully develop product candidates which are designed to treat advanced solid tumors, utilizing a novel approach to directed-radiation therapy. There are currently few approved radiopharmaceutical therapeutic products. In addition, there has been limited historical clinical trial experience, generally, for the development of radiopharmaceutical therapeutics. As a result, the design and conduct of clinical trials for these product candidates is uncertain and subject to increased risk. While external beam radiation as a therapy for cancers has existed for decades, oncology treatment using systemic delivery of targeted radiopharmaceuticals in general, and alpha emitting isotopes specifically, is relatively new. Only one alpha emitting isotope therapy, Xofigo, which uses the isotope radium-223, or 223radium, has been approved in the United States or the European Union, or EU, and only a limited number of clinical trials of products based on alpha emitting isotope therapies have commenced. Approved therapies containing beta emitting isotopes have also been limited. As such, it is difficult to accurately predict the developmental challenges we may incur for our product candidates as they proceed through discovery or identification, preclinical studies, and clinical trials. In addition, beyond the limited universe of patients treated with Xofigo, assessments of the long-term safety of targeted alpha emitting isotope therapies in humans have been limited, and there may be long-term effects from treatment with our product candidates that we cannot predict at this time. It is difficult for us to predict the time and cost of the development of our product candidates, and we cannot predict whether the application of our technology, or any similar or competitive technologies, will result in the identification, development, and regulatory approval of any products. There can be no assurance that any development problems we experience in the future related to our technology or any of our research programs will not cause significant delays or unanticipated costs, or that such development problems can be solved at all. Any of these factors may prevent us from completing our preclinical studies and clinical trials that we may initiate or commercializing any product candidates we may develop on a timely or profitable basis, if at all.

To obtain the requisite regulatory approvals to market and sell [225Ac]Ac-AKY-1189, [225Ac]Ac-AKY-2519, or any of our future product candidates, we must demonstrate through clinical trials that such product candidates are safe and effective for use in each targeted indication. Most product candidates that begin clinical trials are never approved by regulatory authorities for commercialization. Unforeseen side effects could arise either during clinical development or, if such side effects are more rare, after our products have been approved by regulatory authorities and the approved product has been marketed, resulting in the exposure of additional patients than if such side effect had arisen during a clinical trial. Furthermore, the results of our Phase 1b clinical trial may not demonstrate the clinical utility of [225Ac]Ac-AKY-1189, or reveal an unacceptable safety profile. Additionally, assessments of the long-term safety of targeted alpha-emitting isotope therapies in humans have been limited, and there may be long-term effects from treatment with [225Ac]Ac-AKY-1189 or any of our other current or future product candidates that we cannot predict at this time. Further, 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. Clinical trials that we conduct may not demonstrate the efficacy and safety necessary to obtain regulatory approval to market [225Ac]Ac-AKY-1189, [225Ac]Ac-AKY-2519 or any of our future product candidates. In some instances, there can be significant variability in safety or efficacy results between different clinical trials of the same product candidate due to numerous factors, including changes in trial procedures set forth in protocols, differences in the size and type of the patient populations, changes in and adherence to the clinical trial protocols, and the rate of dropout among clinical trial participants. Additionally, our Phase 1b clinical trial for [225Ac]Ac-AKY-1189 is, and we expect future trials of our product candidates to be, open-label trials, meaning both the patient and investigator know whether the patient is receiving the investigational product candidate. Open-label clinical trials are subject to various limitations that may exaggerate any therapeutic effect, as patients in open-label clinical trials are aware when they are receiving treatment. In addition, open-label clinical trials may be subject to an "investigator bias" where those assessing and reviewing the physiological outcomes of the clinical trials are aware of which patients have received treatment and may interpret the information of the treated group more favorably given this knowledge. Therefore, it is possible that positive results observed in an open-label trial would not be replicated in a controlled trial. Moreover, if unacceptable toxicities, undesirable side effects or adverse product-product interactions arise in the development of our product candidates alone or in combination with other therapies, we could suspend or terminate or trials, or the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could order us to cease clinical trials, deny approval of the product candidate for any or all targeted indications or require a more restrictive label. If the results of our clinical trials are inconclusive with respect to the efficacy of product candidates, if we do not meet the clinical endpoints with statistical and clinically meaningful significance, if there are safety concerns associated with our product candidates, or if the results observed cannot be replicated, we may be delayed in obtaining regulatory approval, if at all. Additionally, any safety concerns observed in our clinical trials, or in the clinical experience of others using our product candidates in "compassionate use" scenarios outside of the United States, or investigating similar products or modalities could impact our prospects for regulatory approval in those and other indications. Even if the trials are successfully completed, clinical data is often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and we cannot guarantee that the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities will interpret the results as we do, and more trials could be required before we submit any future BLA or comparable foreign application. We cannot guarantee that the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities will view our product candidates as having efficacy even if positive results are observed in clinical trials. Moreover, results acceptable to support approval in one jurisdiction may be deemed inadequate by another regulatory authority to support regulatory approval in that other jurisdiction. To the extent that the results of the clinical trials are not satisfactory to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for support of a regulatory application, approval of our product candidates may be significantly delayed, or we may be required to expend significant additional resources, which may not be available to us, to conduct additional development work. Even if regulatory approval is secured for a product candidate, the terms of such approval may limit the scope and use of the specific product candidate, which may also limit its commercial potential.

We, and any future collaborators, are not permitted to commercialize, market, promote or sell any product candidate in the United States without obtaining regulatory approval from the FDA. Foreign regulatory authorities, such as the European Medicines Agency, or EMA, impose similar requirements. The time required to obtain approval by the FDA and comparable foreign authorities is unpredictable, but typically takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and depends upon numerous factors, including substantial discretion of the regulatory authorities. In addition, approval policies, regulations, or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a product candidate's clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions. We, and any future collaborators, must complete additional preclinical studies and clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our product candidates in humans before we will be able to obtain these approvals. For our current and future product candidates, we may not be able to file IND applications, or similar applications outside the United States, on the timelines we expect. For example, we may experience supply or manufacturing delays or other delays with IND-enabling, or equivalent foreign preclinical studies. Moreover, we cannot be sure that submission of an IND application, or similar applications outside the United States, will result in the FDA, or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, allowing clinical trials to begin, or that, once begun, issues will not arise that suspend or terminate clinical trials. Additionally, even if such regulatory authorities agree with the design and implementation of the clinical trials set forth in an IND application, or similar applications outside the United States, we cannot guarantee that such regulatory authorities will not change their requirements in the future. We also cannot predict that approval of an IND application or similar application by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority will result in approval of similar applications to conduct clinical trials. These considerations also apply to new clinical trials we may submit as amendments to existing INDs or similar approvals outside the United States. We do not know whether planned clinical trials will begin on time, need to be redesigned, enroll patients on time, or be completed on schedule, if at all. Clinical trials can be delayed, suspended, or terminated for a variety of reasons, including the following: - delays in or failure to obtain regulatory authorization to commence a clinical trial;- delays in or failure to obtain institutional review board, or IRB, approval at each site or national competent authority approvals including positive ethics committee opinions;- delays in or failure to reach agreement on acceptable terms with prospective contract research organizations, or CROs, and clinical trial sites, the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different CROs and trial sites;- difficulty in recruiting clinical trial investigators of appropriate competencies and experience;- delays in establishing the appropriate dosage levels in clinical trials;- delays in or failure to recruit and enroll suitable patients to participate in a clinical trial, as well as inclusion and exclusion criteria and patients' prior lines of therapy and treatment;- lower than anticipated retention rates of patients in clinical trials;- failure to have patients complete a trial or return for post-treatment follow-up;- clinical sites deviating from trial protocol or dropping out of a clinical trial;- delays adding new investigators or clinical trial sites;- our third-party research contractors failing to comply with regulatory requirements or meet their contractual obligations to us in a timely manner, or at all;- changes in regulatory requirements, policies, and guidelines;- our ability to obtain sufficient radioactive supplies, and to manufacture and deliver sufficient quantities of a product candidate for use in clinical trials;- the quality or stability of a product candidate falling below acceptable standards;- changes in the treatment landscape for our target indications in oncology that may make any of our current or future product candidates no longer relevant;- third-party actions claiming infringement by our product candidates in clinical trials outside the United States and obtaining injunctions interfering with our progress; and - business interruptions resulting from geo-political actions, including war and terrorism, natural disasters including earthquakes, typhoons, floods, and wildfires, or disease. Moreover, clinical trials must be conducted in accordance with the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities' legal requirements, regulations, and guidelines, and are subject to oversight by regulatory authorities and IRBs or ethics committees at the medical institutions where the clinical trials are conducted. Safety or tolerability concerns could cause us or regulatory authorities, as applicable, to suspend or terminate a clinical trial if it is found that the participants are being exposed to unacceptable health risks, undesirable side effects, or other unfavorable characteristics of the product candidate, or if such undesirable effects or risks are found to be caused by a chemically or mechanistically similar therapeutic or therapeutic candidate. We could encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by the IRBs or ethics committees of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted, by the data review committee or data safety monitoring board for such trial or by the FDA, or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Such authorities may impose such a suspension or termination due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a product, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions, or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. In 2021, the FDA launched Project Optimus as an initiative to reform the dose optimization and dose selection paradigm in oncology drug development with the goal of advancing an oncology dose-finding and dose optimization paradigm that emphasizes dose selections that maximize efficacy as well as safety and tolerability. In support of this initiative, the FDA may request sponsors of oncology product candidates to conduct dose optimization studies before permitting sponsors to initiate a pivotal study. In early 2023, the FDA issued a draft guidance intended to assist sponsors in identifying the optimal dosages for these products during clinical development and prior to applying for approval for a new indication and usage as well as another draft guidance intended to provide recommendations to sponsors of anticancer drugs or biological products on considerations for designing trials intended to support accelerated approval. In August 2004, the FDA issued final guidance on optimizing the dosage of oncology drugs and biologics, which noted that while the guidance did not contain specific recommendations for radiopharmaceuticals, some of the recommendations in the guidance may be applicable to these products. If we are required to conduct dose optimizing studies, such studies may delay our product development activities. If we or our collaborators are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies governing clinical trials, our development plans may be impacted. For example, in December 2022, with the passage of Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act, or FDORA, Congress required sponsors to develop and submit a diversity action plan for each Phase 3 clinical trial or any other "pivotal study" of a new drug or biological product. These plans are meant to encourage the enrollment of more diverse patient populations in late-stage clinical trials of FDA-regulated products. In June 2024, as mandated by FDORA, the FDA issued draft guidance outlining the general requirements for Diversity Action Plans, or DAPs. Unlike most guidance documents issued by the FDA, the DAP guidance when finalized will have the force of law because FDORA specifically dictates that the form and manner for submission of DAPs are specified in FDA guidance. On January 27, 2025, in response to an Executive Order issued on January 21, 2025, on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion programs, the FDA removed this draft guidance from its website. This action raises questions about the applicability of statutory obligations to submit DAPs and the agency's current thinking on best practices for clinical development. Furthermore, even if we are able to complete our manufacturing facility, we will continue to rely on contract manufacturing organizations, or CMOs, and contract development and manufacturing organization, or CDMOs, for the proper and timely manufacturing of our product candidates in accordance with cGMP requirements. We also intend to continue to rely on CROs and clinical trial sites to ensure the proper and timely conduct of our clinical trials in compliance with good clinical practice, or GCP, requirements. While we have agreements governing their committed activities, we will have limited influence over their actual performance. To the extent our CMOs fail to comply with cGMP or to perform their manufacturing obligations in a timely manner, or our CROs fail to enroll participants for our clinical trials, fail to conduct the study in accordance with GCP, or are delayed for a significant time in the execution of trials, including achieving full enrollment, we may be affected by increased costs, program delays, or both, which may harm our business. Moreover, any clinical trials that we may conduct in countries outside the United States may subject us to further delays and expenses because of increased shipment and distribution costs, additional regulatory requirements, and the engagement of non-U.S. CROs, as well as expose us to risks associated with clinical investigators who are unknown to the FDA, and different standards of diagnosis, screening, and medical care. The FDA may decline to accept the data we obtain from these clinical studies in support of an IND application or a biologics license application, or BLA, in the United States, which may require us to repeat or conduct additional preclinical studies or clinical trials that we did not anticipate in the United States, and therefore we may be unable to commercialize our current or future product candidates, on a timely basis or at all in the United States. Foreign regulatory authorities may also decline to accept data obtained from clinical studies conducted in the United States in support of a related marketing authorization application which may lead to similar risks in countries outside the United States. If we experience delays in the completion of, or termination of, any clinical trial, the commercial prospects of [225Ac]Ac-AKY-1189 for Nectin-4 expressing tumors, or our other product candidates will be harmed, and our ability to generate revenue from sales of any products will be delayed. In addition, any delays in completing our clinical trials will increase our costs, slow down our development and approval process, and jeopardize our ability to commence sales and generate revenue. Significant clinical trial delays could also allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do or shorten any periods during which we have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates and impair our ability to commercialize our product candidates and may harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

The process for obtaining marketing approval for any product candidate, including [225Ac]Ac-AKY-1189, is very long and risky and there will be significant challenges for us to address to obtain marketing approval as planned, if at all. There is no guarantee that the results obtained in our ongoing and planned clinical trials of [225Ac]Ac-AKY-1189 will be sufficient to obtain regulatory approval. Furthermore, success in an early-stage trial does not necessarily mean a later stage trial will be successful. In addition, because our other product candidates are based on similar technology of our lead product candidate, if [225Ac]Ac-AKY-1189 encounters safety or efficacy problems, manufacturing or supply interruptions, developmental delays, regulatory issues, or other problems, our development plans and business related to other product candidates could be significantly harmed.

We are early in our development efforts. The success of our business depends upon our ability to identify, develop, and commercialize targeted radiopharmaceuticals across a range of oncology indications. [225Ac]Ac-AKY-1189, our most advanced product candidate, is in a Phase 1b clinical trial for the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic UC and other Nectin-4 expressing tumors. Commencing clinical trials for our current or future product candidates in the United States is subject to clearance by the FDA of an IND application and finalizing the trial design based on discussions with the FDA. In the event that the FDA requires us to complete additional preclinical studies or we are required to satisfy other FDA requests prior to commencing clinical trials, the start of our planned future clinical trials may be delayed or we may be unsuccessful obtaining clearance to proceed into clinical development. In addition, clinical trials conducted in one country, may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries, and regulatory approval in one country does not guarantee regulatory approval in any other country. Although the FDA may accept data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States, acceptance of these data is subject to conditions imposed by the FDA, and there can be no assurance that the FDA will accept data from trials conducted outside of the United States. If the FDA does not accept the data from any trial that we conduct outside the United States, it would likely result in the need for additional trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and could delay or permanently halt our development of the applicable product candidates. Our ability to generate product revenues, which we do not expect will occur for many years, if ever, will depend heavily on the successful development and eventual commercialization of one or more of our product candidates. The success of our product candidates will depend on several factors, including the following: - successful completion of clinical trials;- effective INDs or comparable foreign applications that allow commencement of our planned clinical trials or future clinical trials for any product candidates we may develop;- successful completion of planned preclinical studies and initiation of clinical trials for our other product candidates;- successful patient enrollment in, and completion of, clinical trials;- the ability to successfully develop [225Ac]Ac-AKY-1189 for any Nectin-4 expressing tumors and [225Ac]Ac-AKY-2519 for any B7-H3 expressing tumors;- the ability to successfully develop additional product candidates;- our ability to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority that the applicable product candidate's risk-benefit ratio for its proposed indication is acceptable;- timely receipt of approvals for product candidates from applicable regulatory authorities;- the extent of any required post-regulatory approval commitments to applicable regulatory authorities;- obtaining and maintaining patent and trade secret protection and regulatory exclusivity for our product candidates;- sourcing clinical and, if approved for commercial sale, commercial supplies for the radioisotopes used to manufacture our product candidates;- securing reliable transport for our product candidates given that isotope stability times are limited once a molecule has been bound;- successfully establishing and operating our manufacturing facility;- the ability of dosimetry and imaging assessments to demonstrate sufficient tumor uptake of imaging radioisotopes conjugated to our miniproteins;- making and maintaining arrangements with third-party manufacturers for both clinical and commercial supplies of our product candidates;- establishing sales, marketing and distribution capabilities and successfully launching commercial sales of our products, if and when approved, whether alone or in collaboration with others;- acceptance of our products, if and when approved, by patients, the medical community and third-party payors;- effectively competing with other cancer therapies;- educating medical personnel regarding the potential side effect profile of our product candidates;- facilitating patient access to the facilities able to administer our product candidates, if approved;- obtaining and maintaining third-party coverage and adequate reimbursement; and - maintaining a continued acceptable safety profile of our products following regulatory approval. If we do not achieve one or more of these factors in a timely manner, or at all, we could experience significant delays or be unable to successfully commercialize our product candidates, which would materially harm our business.

Successful and timely completion of clinical trials will require that we enroll and retain a sufficient number of patient candidates. Any clinical trials we conduct may be subject to delays for a variety of reasons, including as a result of patient enrollment taking longer than anticipated, patient withdrawal, or adverse events. These types of developments could cause us to delay the trial or halt further development. Our clinical trials will compete with other clinical trials that are in the same therapeutic areas as our product candidates, and this competition reduces the number and types of patients available to us, as 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. In addition, in the future, we may evaluate our product candidates as first-in-line treatments for which there are other approved treatment alternatives, which may present enrollment challenges. Because the number of qualified clinical investigators and clinical trial sites capable of administering radiopharmaceutical therapies is limited, we expect to conduct some of our clinical trials at the same clinical trial sites that some of our competitors use, which will reduce the number of patients who are available for our clinical trials at such clinical trial sites. Enrollment may also depend in part on the medical community and public's perception of our product candidates or those of our competitors. Adverse events in our preclinical studies or clinical trials or those of our competitors or of academic researchers or other clinicians utilizing our product candidates under "compassionate use" pathways outside the United States, or similar technologies, even if not ultimately attributable to product candidates we may discover and develop, and the resulting publicity could result in unfavorable public perception and adversely impact our ability to enroll clinical trials. Delays in the completion of any clinical trial of [225Ac]Ac-AKY-1189 for Nectin-4 expressing tumors or our other current or future product candidates will increase our costs, slow down the development and approval process, and delay or potentially jeopardize our ability to commence sales and generate revenue. In addition, some 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 [225Ac]Ac-AKY-1189 or any other current or future product candidates.

A key element of our strategy is to apply our development pipeline to address a broad array of cancer targets and new therapeutic areas. The therapeutic discovery activities that we are conducting may not be successful in identifying product candidates that are useful in treating targets in oncology. Our research programs may be unsuccessful in identifying potential product candidates, or our potential product candidates may be shown to have harmful side effects or may have other characteristics that may make the products unmarketable or unlikely to receive regulatory approval. Because we have limited financial and managerial resources, we focus on research programs, therapeutic platforms, and product candidates that we identify for specific indications. 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, therapeutic platforms, 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 need to relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through collaboration, licensing, or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights.