Black Diamond Therapeutics (BDTX) Risk Analysis

We are very early in our development efforts, and most of our product candidates are still in early clinical or preclinical development. We have invested substantially all of our efforts and financial resources in the identification and preclinical development of our product candidates, including the development of our clinical-stage product candidates, BDTX-1535 and BDTX-189. Our ability to generate product revenues, which we do not expect will occur for many years, if ever, will depend on the successful development, approval and eventual commercialization of our product candidates, which may never occur. We currently generate no revenue from sales of any products, and we may never be able to develop or commercialize a marketable product. The success of our product candidates will depend on several factors, including the following: •successful completion of preclinical studies; •approval of INDs for our planned clinical trials or future clinical trials; •FDA acceptance of our tumor-agnostic development strategy; •successful enrollment in future clinical trials; •positive results from future clinical trials that are supportive of safety and efficacy in the intended patient populations; •successful development of companion diagnostics for use with certain of our product candidates; •receipt of regulatory approvals from applicable regulatory authorities; •establishing commercial manufacturing capabilities or making arrangements with third-party manufacturers for clinical supply and commercial manufacturing; •obtaining and maintaining patent and trade secret protection or regulatory exclusivity for our product candidates; •launching commercial sales of our product candidates, if and when approved, whether alone or in collaboration with others; •acceptance of the product candidates, if and when approved, by patients, the medical community and third-party payors; •effectively competing with other therapies; •obtaining and maintaining third-party insurance coverage and adequate reimbursement; •obtaining, enforcing and defending intellectual property rights and claims; and •maintaining a continued acceptable safety profile of the product candidates following 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 an inability to successfully commercialize our product candidates, which would materially harm our business. If we do not receive regulatory approvals for our product candidates, we may not be able to continue our operations.

The number of patients that we plan to dose in our initial clinical trials is small. 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. As a result, there may be less certainty that such product candidates would achieve a statistically significant effect in any future clinical trials. If we conduct any future clinical trials of BDTX-1535 or BDTX-189, we may not achieve a statistically significant result or the same level of statistical significance, if any, that we might have anticipated based on the results observed in our initial clinical trials. Further, clinical trials by their nature utilize a sample of the potential patient population. With a limited number of patients and limited duration of exposure, rare and severe side effects of our product candidates may only be uncovered with a significantly larger number of patients exposed to the drug candidate. If our product candidates receive marketing approval and we or others identify undesirable side effects caused by such product candidates (or any other similar drugs) after such approval, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including: •regulatory authorities may withdraw or limit their approval of such product candidates; •regulatory authorities may require the addition of labeling statements, such as a “boxed” warning or a contraindication; •we may be required to change the way such product candidates are distributed or administered, conduct additional clinical trials or change the labeling of the product candidates; •regulatory authorities may require a REMS plan to mitigate risks, which could include medication guides, physician communication plans, or elements to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools; •we may be subject to regulatory investigations and government enforcement actions; •we may decide to remove such product candidates from the marketplace; •we could be sued and held liable for injury caused to individuals exposed to or taking our product candidates; and •our reputation may suffer. We believe that any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the affected product candidates and could substantially increase the costs of commercializing our product candidates, if approved, and significantly impact our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and generate revenues.

All of our lead product candidates are in early clinical development or in preclinical development and their risk of failure is high. It is impossible to predict when or if any of our product candidates will prove effective and safe in humans or will receive regulatory approval. Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of any drug candidate, we must complete preclinical studies and then conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our product candidates in humans. A failure of one or more clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing. The outcome of preclinical development testing 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. 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 product candidates. Our preclinical studies and future clinical trials may not be successful. We cannot be certain that our preclinical study and clinical trial results will be sufficient to support regulatory approval of our product candidates. Clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Human clinical trials are expensive and difficult to design and implement, in part because they are subject to rigorous regulatory requirements. Failure or delay can occur at any time during the clinical trial process. Additionally, some of the clinical trials we conduct may be open-label in study design and may be conducted at a limited number of clinical sites on a limited number of patients. An “open-label” clinical trial is one where both the patient and investigator know whether the patient is receiving the investigational product candidate or either an existing approved drug or placebo. Most typically, open-label clinical trials test only the investigational product candidate and sometimes may do so at different dose levels. 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. Open-label clinical trials may be subject to a “patient bias” where patients perceive their symptoms to have improved merely due to their awareness of receiving an experimental treatment. Moreover, patients selected for early clinical studies often include the most severe sufferers and their symptoms may have been bound to improve notwithstanding the new 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. Given that our Phase 1 clinical trial of BDTX-1535 and our Phase 1/2 clinical trial of BDTX-189 include an open-label dosing design, the results from these clinical trials may not be predictive of future clinical trial results with these or other product candidates for which we conduct an open-label clinical trial when studied in a controlled environment with a placebo or active control. We may experience delays in obtaining the FDA’s authorization to initiate clinical trials under future INDs, completing ongoing preclinical studies of our other product candidates, and initiating our planned preclinical studies and clinical trials. Additionally, we cannot be certain that preclinical studies or clinical trials for our product candidates will begin on time, not require redesign, enroll an adequate number of subjects on time, or be completed on schedule, if at all. For example, at a meeting with the FDA in March 2021, the FDA notified us that, because the then planned Phase 2 portion of our ongoing clinical trial of BDTX-189 would be potentially registrational and support a new drug application, we could only enroll up to 50 patients in Phase 2 before results of routine three-month good laboratory practice, or GLP, toxicology studies have been submitted and accepted by the FDA. This partial clinical hold on Phase 2 enrollment was not based on any safety findings from the MasterKey-01 trial and has no impact on completion of our Phase 1 study (including the currently enrolling safety expansion cohort). We have completed the three-month GLP toxicology studies and submitted the reports to the FDA who accepted the findings and lifted the partial clinical hold in January 2022. Clinical trials can be delayed or terminated for a variety of reasons, including delays or failures related to: •the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities disagreeing as to the design or implementation of our clinical trials; •the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities disagreeing with our tumor-agnostic development strategy; •delays in obtaining regulatory approval to commence a clinical trial; •reaching agreement on acceptable terms with prospective CROs and clinical trial sites, the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different CROs and clinical trial sites; •obtaining IRB approval at each clinical trial site; •recruiting an adequate number of suitable patients to participate in a clinical trial; •the number of patients required for clinical trials of our product candidates may be larger than we anticipate; •having subjects complete a clinical trial or return for post-treatment follow-up; •clinical trial sites deviating from clinical trial protocol or dropping out of a clinical trial; •addressing subject safety concerns that arise during the course of a clinical trial; •adding a sufficient number of clinical trial sites; or •obtaining sufficient product supply of product candidate for use in preclinical studies or clinical trials from third-party suppliers. We may experience numerous adverse or unforeseen events during, or as a result of, preclinical studies and clinical trials that could delay or prevent our ability to receive marketing approval or commercialize our product candidates, including: •we may receive feedback from regulatory authorities that requires us to modify the design of our clinical trials; •clinical trials of our product candidates may produce negative or inconclusive results, and we may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional clinical trials or abandon our research efforts for our other product candidates; •clinical trials of our product candidates may not produce differentiated or clinically significant results across tumor types or indications; •the number of patients required for clinical trials of our product candidates may be larger than we anticipate, enrollment in these clinical trials may be slower than we anticipate or participants may drop out of our clinical trials at a higher rate than we anticipate; •our third-party contractors may fail to comply with regulatory requirements, fail to maintain adequate quality controls or be unable to provide us with sufficient product supply to conduct and complete preclinical studies or clinical trials of our product candidates in a timely manner, or at all; •we or our investigators might have to suspend or terminate clinical trials of our product candidates for various reasons, including non-compliance with regulatory requirements, a finding that our product candidates have undesirable side effects or other unexpected characteristics or a finding that the participants are being exposed to unacceptable health risks; •the cost of clinical trials of our product candidates may be greater than we anticipate, for example, if we experiences delays or challenges in identifying patients with the mutations required for our clinical trials, we may have to reimburse sites for genetic sequencing costs in order to encourage sequencing of additional patients; •the quality of our product candidates or other materials necessary to conduct preclinical studies or clinical trials of our product candidates may be insufficient or inadequate, and any transfer of manufacturing activities may require unforeseen manufacturing or formulation changes; •regulators may revise the requirements for approving our product candidates, or such requirements may not be as we anticipate; and •future collaborators may conduct clinical trials in ways they view as advantageous to them but that are suboptimal for us. If we are required or choose to conduct additional clinical trials or other testing of our product candidates beyond those that we currently contemplate, if we are unable to successfully complete clinical trials of our product candidates or other testing, if the results of these trials or tests are not positive or are only moderately positive or if there are safety concerns, our business and results of operations may be adversely affected and we may incur significant additional costs. We could also encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by the IRBs of the institutions in which such clinical trials are being conducted, by the Data Safety Monitoring Board, if any, for such clinical trial or by the FDA or other regulatory authorities. Such authorities may suspend or terminate a clinical trial due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical trial 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 the product candidates, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. Moreover, principal investigators for our future clinical trials may serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us from time to time and receive compensation in connection with such services. Under certain circumstances, we may be required to report some of these relationships to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority may conclude that a financial relationship between us and a principal investigator has created a conflict of interest or otherwise affected interpretation of the study. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority may therefore question the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site and the utility of the clinical trial itself may be jeopardized. This could result in a delay in approval, or rejection, of our marketing applications by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority, as the case may be, and may ultimately lead to the denial of marketing approval of one or more of our product candidates. If we experience delays in the completion, or termination, of any preclinical study or clinical trial of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of our product candidates may be harmed, and our ability to generate revenues from any of these product candidates will be delayed or not realized at all. In addition, any delays in completing our preclinical studies or clinical trials may increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and approval process and jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenues. Any of these occurrences may significantly harm our business, financial condition and prospects. In addition, 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. If one or more of our product candidates generally prove to be ineffective, unsafe or commercially unviable, our entire pipeline and MAP drug discovery engine could have little, if any, value, which would have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We are very early in our development efforts. Most of our product candidates are still in preclinical development and have never been tested in human subjects. Our ability to generate product revenues, which we do not expect will occur for many years, if ever, will depend heavily on the successful clinical development and eventual commercialization of BDTX-1535, BDTX-189 and one or more of our other product candidates. In addition, our drug development programs contemplate the development of companion diagnostics, which are assays or tests to identify an appropriate patient population. Companion diagnostics are subject to regulation as medical devices and must themselves be approved for marketing by the FDA or certain other foreign regulatory agencies before we may commercialize our product candidates. The success of our product candidates will depend on several factors, including the following: •successful completion of preclinical studies; •approval of INDs for our planned clinical trials or future clinical trials; •FDA acceptance of our tumor-agnostic development strategy; •successful initiation of clinical trials; •successful patient enrollment in and completion of clinical trials; •successful development of companion diagnostics for use with our product candidates; •safety, tolerability and efficacy profiles for our product candidates that are satisfactory to the FDA or any foreign regulatory authority for marketing approval; •receipt of marketing approvals for our product candidates and any companion diagnostics from applicable regulatory authorities; •the extent of any required post-marketing approval commitments to applicable regulatory authorities; •obtaining and maintaining patent and trade secret protection and regulatory exclusivity for our product candidates; •making arrangements with third-party manufacturers, or establishing manufacturing capabilities, for both clinical and commercial supplies of our product candidates, if any product candidates are approved; •establishing sales, marketing and distribution capabilities and 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; •obtaining and maintaining third-party coverage and adequate reimbursement; •maintaining a continued acceptable safety profile of our products following approval; and •factors we may not be able to control, such as current or potential pandemics that may limit patients, principal investigators or staff or clinical site availability (e.g. the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic). There is no guarantee that the results obtained in current preclinical studies or our open-label clinical trial of BDTX-1535 or BDTX-189 will be sufficient to obtain regulatory approval or marketing authorization for such product candidates. Negative results in the development of our lead product candidates may also impact our ability to obtain regulatory approval for our other product candidates, either at all or within anticipated timeframes because, although other product candidates may target different indications, the underlying technology platform, manufacturing process and development process is the same for all of our product candidates. Accordingly, a failure in any one program may affect the ability to obtain regulatory approval to continue or conduct clinical programs for other product candidates. For example, although we believe based on our preclinical studies that the conformational change to the active site receptor is similar for all of the genetic mutations we are targeting and therefore the chemical structures of our lead product candidates will suffice to bind adequately to such receptor for all such mutations, this may not prove true in clinical testing for all or any of the targeted mutations. Moreover, anti-tumor activity may be different in each of the different tumor types we plan on evaluating in the clinical trial. Therefore, the tumor response may be low in patients with some cancers compared to others. This may result in discontinuation of development of a product candidate for patients with these tumor types and/or mutations due to insufficient clinical benefit while continuing development for a more limited population of patients more likely to benefit. As a consequence, we may have to negotiate with the FDA to reach agreement on defining the optimal patient population, study design and size in order to obtain regulatory approval, any of which may require significant additional resources and delay the timing of our clinical trials and ultimately the approval, if any, of any of our product candidates. In addition, because we have limited financial and personnel resources and are placing significant focus on the development of our clinical-stage product candidates, we may forgo or delay pursuit of opportunities with other future product candidates that later prove to have greater commercial potential. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development programs and other future product candidates for specific indications may not yield any commercially viable future product candidates. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular future product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to those future product candidates 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 to such future product candidates.

Identifying and qualifying patients to participate in clinical studies of our product candidates is critical to our success. The timing of completion of our clinical studies depends in part on the speed at which we can recruit patients to participate in testing our product candidates, and we may experience delays in our clinical trials if we encounter difficulties in enrollment. We may not be able to initiate or continue clinical trials for our product candidates if we are unable to locate and enroll a sufficient number of eligible patients to participate in these trials as required by the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside the United States. In particular, because we are focused on patients with specific genetic mutations, our ability to enroll eligible patients may be limited or may result in slower enrollment than we anticipate. For example, for both BDTX-1535 and BDTX-189, we cannot be certain how many patients will have each of the genetic mutations that these product candidates are designed to target or that the number of patients enrolled for each mutation will suffice for regulatory approval and inclusion of each such mutation in the approved label. In addition, some of our competitors have ongoing clinical trials for product candidates that treat the same indications as our product candidates, and patients who would otherwise be eligible for our clinical trials may instead enroll in clinical trials of our competitors’ product candidates. In addition to the potentially small populations, the eligibility criteria of our planned clinical trials will further limit the pool of available study participants as we will require that patients have specific characteristics that we can measure to assure their disease is either severe enough or not too advanced to include them in a study. Additionally, the process of finding and diagnosing patients may prove costly. We also may not be able to identify, recruit and enroll a sufficient number of patients to complete our clinical studies because of the perceived risks and benefits of the product candidate under study, the availability and efficacy of competing therapies and clinical trials, the proximity and availability of clinical study sites for prospective patients, the availability of genetic sequencing information for patient tumors so that we can identify patients with the targeted genetic mutations, and the patient referral practices of physicians. If patients are unwilling to participate in our studies for any reason, the timeline for recruiting patients, conducting studies and obtaining regulatory approval of potential products may be delayed. We intend to engage third parties to develop companion diagnostics for use in our clinical trials, but such third parties may not be successful in developing such companion diagnostics, furthering the difficulty in identifying patients with the targeted genetic mutations for our clinical trials. Further, if we are unable to include patients with the targeted genetic mutations, this could compromise our ability to seek participation in FDA’s expedited review and development programs, including Breakthrough Therapy Designation and Fast Track Designation, or otherwise seek to accelerate clinical development and regulatory timelines. The enrollment of patients further depends on many factors, including: •the proximity of patients to clinical trial sites; •the design of the clinical trial; •our ability to recruit clinical trial investigators with the appropriate competencies and experience; •our ability to obtain and maintain patient consents; •impacts of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic on clinical trial site activation; •reporting of the preliminary results of any of our clinical trials; and •the risk that patients enrolled in clinical trials will drop out of the clinical trials before clinical trial completion. In 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 clinical trials may instead opt to enroll in a clinical trial being conducted by one of our competitors. Since the number of qualified clinical investigators 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. Moreover, because our product candidates represent a departure from more commonly used methods for cancer treatment and because most of our product candidates have not been tested in humans before, potential patients and their doctors may be inclined to use conventional therapies, such as chemotherapy, rather than enroll patients in any future clinical trial. Additionally, because our clinical trials are in patients with relapsed/refractory cancer, the patients are typically in the late stages of their disease and may experience disease progression independent from our product candidates, making them unevaluable for purposes of the clinical trial and requiring additional patient enrollment. If we experience delays in the completion of, or termination of, any clinical trial of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of our product candidates will be harmed, and our ability to generate product revenue from any of these product candidates could be delayed or prevented.

We have limited experience as a company in conducting clinical trials. In part because of this limited experience, we cannot be certain that our ongoing preclinical studies will be completed on time or if the planned preclinical studies and clinical trials will begin or be completed on time, if at all. Large-scale clinical trials would require significant additional financial and management resources and reliance on third-party clinical investigators, contract research organizations, or CROs, and consultants. Relying on third-party clinical investigators, CROs and consultants may force us to encounter delays that are outside of our control. We may be unable to identify and contract with sufficient investigators, CROs and consultants on a timely basis or at all. For BDTX-1535 and BDTX-189, we have entered into master services agreements with CROs to conduct our first-in-human clinical trials. There can be no assurance that we will be able to negotiate and enter into any additional master services agreement with other CROs, as necessary, on terms that are acceptable to us on a timely basis or at all.

Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of our product candidates, including BDTX-1535 and BDTX-189, we must demonstrate through lengthy, complex and expensive preclinical studies and clinical trials that our product candidates are both safe and effective for use in each target indication. Preclinical and clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the preclinical study and clinical trial processes, and, because our product candidates are in an early stage of development, there is a high risk of failure and we may never succeed in developing marketable products. The results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. Although product candidates may demonstrate promising results in preclinical studies and early clinical trials, they may not prove to be effective in subsequent clinical trials. For example, testing on animals occurs under different conditions than testing in humans and therefore, the results of animal studies may not accurately predict human experience. There is typically an extremely high rate of attrition from the failure of product candidates proceeding through preclinical studies and clinical trials. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety, potency, purity and efficacy profile despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. Likewise, early, smaller-scale clinical trials may not be predictive of eventual safety or effectiveness in large-scale pivotal clinical trials. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of potency or efficacy, insufficient durability of potency or efficacy or unacceptable safety issues, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials. Most product candidates that commence preclinical studies and clinical trials are never approved as products. Any preclinical studies or clinical trials that we may conduct may not demonstrate the safety, potency, purity and efficacy necessary to obtain regulatory approval to market our product candidates. If the results of our ongoing or future preclinical studies and clinical trials are inconclusive with respect to the safety, potency, purity and efficacy of our product candidates, if we do not meet the clinical endpoints with statistical and clinically meaningful significance, or if there are safety concerns associated with our product candidates, we may be prevented or delayed in obtaining marketing approval for such product candidates. In some instances, there can be significant variability in safety, potency, purity or efficacy results between different preclinical studies and 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. As is the case with all oncology drugs, it is likely that there may be side effects associated with their use. Results of our trials could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of these or other side effects. In such an event, our trials could be suspended or terminated and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could order us to cease further development of or deny approval of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. Drug-related side effects could also affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the trial or result in potential product liability claims. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly. Further, our product candidates could cause undesirable side effects in clinical trials related to on-target toxicity. For example, other EGFR inhibitors have experienced dose limiting toxicities due to rash in patients and, although we have designed our product candidates to be “wild-type” sparing to limit the risk of similar toxicities, clinical results may differ and patients may also experience similar or different toxicities that limit the dose and/or efficacy of our product candidates. If on-target toxicity is observed, or if our product candidates have characteristics that are unexpected, we may need to abandon their development or limit development to more narrow uses or subpopulations in which the undesirable side effects or other characteristics are less prevalent, less severe or more acceptable from a risk-benefit perspective. Many compounds that initially showed promise in early stage testing for treating cancer have later been found to cause side effects that prevented further development of the compound.

We submitted an IND for BDTX-189 in November 2019, which was allowed by the FDA on December 13, 2019. Further, we submitted an IND for BDTX-1535 in December 2021, which was allowed by the FDA on January 6, 2022. However, we may not be able to file INDs for our other product candidates on the timelines we expect. For example, we may experience manufacturing delays or other delays with IND-enabling studies. Moreover, we cannot be sure that submission of an IND will result in the FDA allowing further 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, we cannot guarantee that such regulatory authorities will not change their requirements in the future. These considerations also apply to new clinical trials we may submit as amendments to existing INDs or to a new IND. Any failure to file INDs on the timelines we expect or to obtain regulatory approvals for our trials may prevent us from completing our clinical trials or commercializing our products on a timely basis, if at all.

The discovery and development of precision medicines for patients with genetically defined cancers is an emerging field, and the scientific discoveries that form the basis for our efforts to discover and develop product candidates are relatively new. The scientific evidence to support the feasibility of developing product candidates based on these discoveries is both preliminary and limited. Although we believe, based on our preclinical work, that the mutations targeted by our programs are oncogenic drivers, clinical results may not confirm this hypothesis or may only confirm it for certain mutations or certain tumor types. The patient populations for our product candidates are limited to those with specific target mutations and may not be completely defined but are substantially smaller than the general treated cancer population, and we will need to screen and identify these patients with the targeted mutations. Successful identification of patients is dependent on several factors, including achieving certainty as to how specific genetic alterations respond to our product candidates and developing companion diagnostics to identify such genetic alterations. Furthermore, even if we are successful in identifying patients, we cannot be certain that the resulting patient populations for each mutation will be large enough to allow us to successfully obtain approval for each mutation type and commercialize our products and achieve profitability. In addition, even if our approach is successful in showing clinical benefit for tumors harboring the targeted mutations affecting the ErbB proteins EGFR and HER2, we may never successfully identify additional oncogenic mutations for other receptor tyrosine kinases. Therefore, we do not know if our approach of treating patients with genetically defined cancers will be successful, and if our approach is unsuccessful, our business will suffer. In addition, we are pursuing a tumor-agnostic development strategy (i.e., pursuing approval based on a biomarker rather than a specific cancer indication). There is currently a limited number of approved tumor-agnostic therapies. We may not receive approval for a tumor-agnostic indication or may be delayed in receiving tumor-agnostic approval.

A key element of our strategy is to use and expand our MAP drug discovery engine to build a pipeline of product candidates and progress these product candidates through clinical development for the treatment of various cancers. Although our research and development efforts to date have resulted in our discovery and development of BDTX-1535 and BDTX-189, these clinical-stage candidates may not be safe or effective as cancer treatments, and we may not be able to develop any other product candidates. Our MAP drug discovery engine is evolving and may not reach a state at which building a pipeline of product candidates is possible. For example, we may not be successful in identifying additional genetic mutations which are oncogenic and which can be “basketed” into a group that is large enough to present a sufficient commercial opportunity or that is druggable with one chemical compound. Even if we are successful in building our pipeline of product candidates, the potential product candidates that we identify may not be suitable for clinical development or generate acceptable clinical data, including as a result of being shown to have unacceptable toxicity or other characteristics that indicate that they are unlikely to be products that will receive marketing approval from the FDA or other regulatory authorities or achieve market acceptance. If we do not successfully develop and commercialize product candidates, we will not be able to generate product revenue in the future, which likely would result in significant harm to our financial position and adversely affect our stock price.

Because we have limited financial and managerial resources, we must focus on a limited number of research programs and product candidates and on specific indications. 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. 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 discovery and preclinical development programs and product candidates for specific indications may not yield any commercially viable products.

To obtain the requisite regulatory approvals to market and sell any of our product candidates, including BDTX-1535, BDTX-189 and any other future product candidates, we must demonstrate through extensive preclinical studies and clinical trials that our products are safe and effective in humans. Our product candidates may fail to demonstrate efficacy in humans, and particularly across tumor types. Clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical trial process and our future clinical trial results may not be successful. Further, the process of obtaining regulatory approval is expensive, often takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and can vary substantially based upon the type, complexity and novelty of the product candidates involved, as well as the target indications, patient population and regulatory agency. Prior to obtaining approval to commercialize a product candidate in the United States or abroad, we or our potential future collaborators must demonstrate with substantial evidence from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials, and to the satisfaction of the FDA, the EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, that such product candidates are safe and effective for their intended uses. Clinical trials that we conduct may not demonstrate the efficacy and safety necessary to obtain regulatory approval to market our 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. If the results of our ongoing or future clinical trials are inconclusive with respect to the efficacy of our product candidates, if we do not meet the clinical endpoints with statistical and clinically meaningful significance, or if there are safety concerns associated with our product candidates, we may be delayed in obtaining marketing approval, if at all. Even if the trials are successfully completed, clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and we cannot guarantee that the FDA, the EMA, or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities will interpret the results as we do, and more trials could be required before we submit our product candidates for approval. We cannot guarantee that the FDA, the EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities will view our product candidates as having sufficient efficacy to support a tumor-agnostic indication even if positive results are observed in clinical trials. To the extent that the results of the trials are not satisfactory to the FDA, the EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities for support of a marketing 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 trials in support of potential approval of our product candidates. Additionally, any safety or efficacy concerns observed in any tumor-specific subgroup of our clinical trials could limit the prospects for regulatory approval of our product candidates for a tumor-agnostic indication, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan designation to a drug or biologic intended to treat a rare disease or condition, defined as a disease or condition with a patient population of fewer than 200,000 in the United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 in the United States when there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available the drug or biologic in the United States will be recovered from sales in the United States for that drug or biologic. Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting an NDA. 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. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the generic identity of the drug and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process. If a product that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for a particular active ingredient for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan product exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including an NDA, to market the same biologic for the same indication for seven years, except in limited circumstances such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan drug exclusivity or if the FDA finds that the holder of the orphan drug exclusivity has not shown that it can assure the availability of sufficient quantities of the orphan drug to meet the needs of patients with the disease or condition for which the drug was designated. As a result, even if one of our product candidates receives orphan exclusivity, the FDA can still approve other drugs that have a different active ingredient for use in treating the same indication or disease. Furthermore, the FDA can waive orphan exclusivity if we are unable to manufacture sufficient supply of our product. We may seek orphan drug designation for BDTX-1535, BDTX-189 and some or all of our other future product candidates in additional orphan indications in which there is a medically plausible basis for the use of these products. Even when we obtain orphan drug designation, exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be limited if we seek approval for an indication broader than the orphan designated indication and 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 quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition. In addition, although we intend to seek orphan drug designation for other product candidates, we may never receive such designations. For example, the FDA has expressed concerns regarding the regulatory considerations for orphan drug designation as applied to tissue agnostic therapies, and the FDA may interpret the FD&C Act and regulations promulgated thereunder in a way that limits or blocks our ability to obtain orphan drug designation or orphan drug exclusivity, if our product candidates are approved, for our targeted indications. On August 3, 2017, Congress passed the FDA Reauthorization Act of 2017, or FDARA. FDARA, among other things, codified the FDA’s pre-existing regulatory interpretation, to require that a drug sponsor demonstrate the clinical superiority of an orphan drug that is otherwise the same as a previously approved drug for the same rare disease in order to receive orphan drug exclusivity. The legislation reverses prior precedent holding that the Orphan Drug Act unambiguously requires that the FDA recognize the orphan exclusivity period regardless of a showing of clinical superiority. Moreover, in the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021, Congress did not further change this interpretation when it clarified that the interpretation codified in FDARA would apply in cases where FDA issued an orphan designation before the enactment of FDARA but where product approval came after the enactment of FDARA. The FDA may further reevaluate the Orphan Drug Act and its regulations and policies. We do not know if, when, or how the FDA may change the orphan drug regulations and policies in the future, and it is uncertain how any changes might affect our business. Depending on what changes the FDA may make to its orphan drug regulations and policies, our business could be adversely impacted.