Milestone Pharmaceuticals (MIST) Risk Analysis

We are governed by the Business Corporations Act (Québec), or the "QBCA," and other relevant laws, which may affect the rights of shareholders differently than those of a company governed by the laws of a U.S. jurisdiction, and may, together with our charter documents, have the effect of delaying, deferring or discouraging another party from acquiring control of us by means of a tender offer, a proxy contest or otherwise, or may affect the price an acquiring party would be willing to offer in such an instance. The material differences between the QBCA and Delaware General Corporation Law, or the "DGCL", that may have the greatest such effect include but are not limited to the following: (i) for material corporate transactions (such as mergers and amalgamations, other extraordinary corporate transactions or amendments to our articles), the QBCA generally requires a two-thirds majority vote by shareholders, whereas the DGCL generally only requires a majority vote; and (ii) under the QBCA, a holder of 10% or more of our common shares can requisition a special meeting of shareholders, whereas such right does not exist under the DGCL.

As of December 31, 2025, we had U.S. federal net operating loss carry-forwards, or "NOLs," of $103.2 million as a result of expenses incurred by Milestone Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., our wholly owned subsidiary. Under current U.S. federal tax law, NOLs incurred in taxable years ending beginning after December 31, 2017 may be carried forward indefinitely. However, the deductibility of such NOLs is limited to 80% of taxable income. It is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to the federal law. In addition, under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and corresponding provisions of state law, if a corporation undergoes an "ownership change," which is generally defined as a greater than 50% change (by value) in its equity ownership over a three year period, the corporation's ability to use its pre change NOL carryforwards and other pre change tax attributes (such as research tax credits) to offset its post change income may be limited. It is possible that we have experienced one or more ownership changes in the past. In addition, we may also experience ownership changes in the future as a result of subsequent shifts in our share ownership, some of which may be outside of our control. As a result, if we earn net taxable income, our ability to use our pre ownership change NOL carryforwards to offset U.S. federal taxable income may be subject to limitations, which could potentially result in increased future tax liability to us. In addition, at the state level, there may be periods during which the use of NOLs is suspended or otherwise limited, which could accelerate or permanently increase state taxes owed.

Our management has broad discretion in the application of our cash and cash equivalents and could spend these funds in ways that do not improve our results of operations or enhance the value of our common shares. The failure by our management to apply these funds effectively could result in financial losses that could have a negative impact on our business, causing the price of our common shares to decline and delay the development of our product candidates. Pending their use, we may invest our cash and cash equivalents, in a manner that does not produce income or that loses value.

We intend to continue to periodically explore a variety of possible strategic collaborations in an effort to gain access to additional product candidates or resources. We are likely to face significant competition in seeking appropriate strategic collaborators, and strategic collaborations can be complicated and time consuming to negotiate and document. We may not be able to negotiate strategic collaborations on acceptable terms, or at all. We are unable to predict when, if ever, we will enter into any strategic collaborations because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with establishing them. Future collaborations could subject us to a number of risks, including: - we may be required to undertake the expenditure of substantial operational, financial, and management resources;- we may be required to issue equity securities that would dilute our shareholders' percentage ownership of our Company;- we may be required to assume substantial actual or contingent liabilities;- we may not be able to control the amount and timing of resources that our strategic collaborators devote to the development or commercialization of our product candidates;- strategic collaborators may select indications or design clinical trials in a way that may be less successful than if we were doing so;- strategic collaborators may delay clinical trials, provide insufficient funding, terminate a clinical trial, or abandon a product candidate, repeat, or conduct new clinical trials or require a new version of a product candidate for clinical testing;- strategic collaborators may not pursue further development of products resulting from the strategic collaboration arrangement or may elect to discontinue research and development programs;- strategic collaborators may not commit adequate resources to the marketing and distribution of our product candidates, limiting our potential revenues from these products;- disputes may arise between us and our strategic collaborators that result in the delay or termination of the research or development of our product candidates or that result in costly litigation or arbitration that diverts management's attention and consumes resources;- strategic collaborators may experience financial difficulties;- strategic collaborators may not properly maintain or defend our intellectual property rights or may use our proprietary information in a manner that could jeopardize or invalidate our proprietary information or expose us to potential litigation;- business combinations or significant changes in a strategic collaborator's business strategy may adversely affect a strategic collaborator's willingness or ability to complete its obligations under any arrangement;- strategic collaborators could decide to move forward with a competing product candidate developed either independently or in collaboration with others, including our competitors; and - strategic collaborators could terminate the arrangement or allow it to expire, which would delay the development and may increase the cost of developing our product candidates.

In the ordinary course of business, we collect, receive, store, process, generate, use, transfer, disclose, make accessible, protect, secure, dispose of, transmit, and share (collectively, "process") personal data and other sensitive information, including proprietary and confidential business data, trade secrets, intellectual property, data we collect about trial participants in connection with clinical trials and sensitive third-party data. Our data processing activities subject us to numerous data privacy and security obligations, such as various laws, regulations, guidance, industry standards, external and internal privacy and security policies, contractual requirements, and other obligations relating to data privacy and security. In the United States, federal, state, and local governments have enacted numerous data privacy and security laws, including data breach notification laws, personal data privacy laws, consumer protection laws (e.g., Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act), and other similar laws (e.g., wiretapping laws). Numerous U.S. states have enacted comprehensive privacy laws that impose certain obligations on covered businesses, including providing specific disclosures in privacy notices and affording residents with certain rights concerning their personal data. The exercise of these rights may impact our business and ability to provide our products and services. Certain states also impose stricter requirements for processing certain personal data, including sensitive information, such as conducting data privacy impact assessments. These state laws allow for statutory fines for noncompliance. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 applies to personal data of consumers, business representatives, and employees who are California residents, and requires businesses to provide specific disclosures in privacy notices and honor requests of such individuals to exercise certain privacy rights. The CCPA provides for and allows private litigants affected by certain data breaches to recover significant statutory damages. Similar laws are being considered in several other states, as well as at the federal and local levels, and we expect more states to pass similar laws in the future. While these states, like the CCPA, also exempt some data processed in the context of clinical trials, these developments further complicate compliance efforts, and increase legal risk and compliance costs for us, the third parties upon whom we rely. We are also subject to new laws governing the privacy of consumer health data. For example, Washington's My Health My Data Act, or "MHMD," broadly defines consumer health data, places restrictions on processing consumer health data (including imposing stringent requirements for consents), provides consumers certain rights with respect to their health data, and creates a private right of action to allow individuals to sue for violations of the law. Other states have passed, are considering, and may adopt similar laws. Outside the United States, an increasing number of laws, regulations, and industry standards govern data privacy and security. For example, the European Union's General Data Protection Regulation, or "EU GDPR," the United Kingdom's GDPR, or "UK GDPR,", and China's Personal Information Protection Law, or "PIPL," impose strict requirements for processing personal data. Additionally, in Canada, the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, or "PIPEDA," and various related provincial laws, as well as Canada's Anti-Spam Legislation, or "CASL," may apply to our operations. We anticipate seeking regulatory approval for, and commercializing, etripamil for the treatment of PSVT in Europe. We may also elect to do so for future product candidates. We are conducting clinical trial activities in Europe, which subject us to European data protection laws, including the EU GDPR and the UK GDPR. The GDPR establishes requirements applicable to the processing of personal data (i.e., data which identifies an individual or from which an individual is identifiable). The GDPR creates significant and complex compliance burdens for companies such as: limiting permitted processing of personal data to only that which is necessary for specified, explicit and legitimate purposes; requiring the establishment a legal basis for processing personal data; expressly confirming that ‘pseudonymized' or key coded data constitutes personal data to which the GDPR applies; creating obligations for controllers and processors to appoint data protection officers in certain circumstances; increasing transparency obligations to data subjects for controllers (including presentation of certain information in a concise, intelligible and easily accessible form about how their personal data is used and their rights vis-à-vis that data and its use); introducing the obligation to carry out so-called data protection impact assessments in certain circumstances; establishing limitations on collection and retention of personal data through ‘data minimization' and ‘storage limitation' principles; establishing obligations to implement ‘privacy by design'; introducing obligations to honor increased rights for data subjects (such as rights for individuals to be ‘forgotten,' rights to data portability, rights to object etc. in certain circumstances); formalizing a heightened and codified standard of data subject consent; establishing obligations to implement certain technical and organizational safeguards to protect the security and confidentiality of personal data; introducing obligations to agree to certain specific contractual terms and to take certain measures when engaging third-party processors and joint controllers; introducing the obligation to provide notice of certain significant personal data breaches to the relevant supervisory authority(ies) and affected individuals; and mandating the appointment of representatives in the United Kingdom, or the "UK," and/or European Union in certain circumstances. The processing of "special category personal data", such as health information, may also impose heightened compliance burdens under the GDPR. The GDPR has robust regulatory enforcement and penalties for noncompliance, including fines of up to €20 million Euros under the EU GDPR, 17.5 million pounds sterling under the UK GDPR, or, in each case 4% of global annual revenue of any noncompliant company for the preceding financial year, whichever is higher or private litigation related to processing of personal data brought by classes of data subjects or consumer protection organizations authorized at law to represent their interests. In addition to administrative fines, a wide variety of other potential enforcement powers are available to competent supervisory authorities in respect of potential and suspected violations of the GDPR, including extensive audit and inspection rights, and powers to order temporary or permanent bans on all or some processing of personal data carried out by noncompliant actors. The GDPR also confers a private right of action on data subjects and consumer associations to lodge complaints with supervisory authorities, seek judicial remedies, and obtain compensation for damages resulting from violations of the GDPR. There may be circumstances under which a failure to comply with GDPR, or the exercise of individual rights under the GDPR, would limit our ability to utilize clinical trial data collected on certain subjects. The GDPR will likely impose additional responsibility and liability in relation to our processing of personal data. This may be onerous and materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. In the ordinary course of business, we transfer personal data from Europe and other jurisdictions to the United States or other countries. Europe and other jurisdictions have enacted laws requiring data to be localized or limiting the transfer of personal data to other countries. In particular, the European Economic Areas, or "EEA," and the UK have significantly restricted the transfer of personal data to the United States and other countries whose privacy laws it generally believes are inadequate. One of the primary safeguards allowing U.S. companies to import personal data from Europe is the European Commission's Standard Contractual Clauses and we have relied on Standard Contractual Clauses to comply with the GDPR's restrictions on transfer of personal data out of Europe. However, in July 2020 the Court of Justice of the European Union, or "CJEU," in a case known colloquially as "Schrems II" raised questions about whether the Standard Contractual Clauses can lawfully be used for personal data transfers from Europe to the United States or other third countries that are not the subject of an adequacy decision of the European Commission. At present, there are few viable alternatives to the Standard Contractual Clauses including the UK's International Data Transfer Agreement / Addendum, and the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework and the UK extension thereto (which allows for transfers to relevant U.S.-based organizations who self-certify compliance and participate in the Framework). However, these mechanisms are subject to legal challenges, and there is no assurance that we can satisfy or rely on these measures to lawfully transfer personal data to the United States. As such, if we are unable to implement a valid solution to transfer  personal data from the EEA,  the UK or other jurisdictions to the United States, or if the requirements for a legally-compliant transfer are too onerous, we could face significant adverse consequences, including the interruption or degradation of our operations, increased exposure to regulatory actions, substantial fines and penalties, injunctions against our processing or transferring of personal data necessary to operate our business, the need to relocate part of or all of our business or data processing activities to other jurisdictions (such as Europe) at significant expense,  and limit our ability to collaborate with partners as well as other service providers, contractors and other companies subject to European data protection laws. Restrictions on our ability to import personal data from Europe could therefore impact our clinical trial activities in Europe and limit our ability to collaborate with CROs and other third parties subject to European data protection laws. Additionally, other countries outside of Europe have enacted or are considering enacting similarly stringent data localization and cross-border data transfer restrictions and laws, which could increase the cost and complexity of delivering our services and operating our business. The type of challenges we face in Europe will likely also arise in other jurisdictions that adopt laws similar in construction to the GDPR or regulatory frameworks of equivalent complexity. Additionally, the U.S. Department of Justice issued a rule entitled Preventing Access to U.S. Sensitive Personal Data and Government-Related Data by Countries of Concern or Covered Persons, which places additional restrictions on certain data transactions involving countries of concern (e.g., China, Russia, Iran) and covered individuals (i.e., individuals and entities located in or controlled by individuals or entities located in those jurisdictions) that may impact certain business activities such as vendor engagements, employment of certain individuals and investor agreements. Violations of the rule could lead to significant civil and criminal fines and penalties. The rule applies regardless of whether data is anonymized, key-coded, pseudonymized, de-identified or encrypted. In addition to data privacy and security laws, we are contractually subject to industry standards adopted by industry groups, and we are and may become in the future, subject to such obligations. We are also bound by contractual obligations related to data privacy and security, and our efforts to comply with such obligations may not be successful. We publish privacy policies, marketing materials, whitepapers, and other statements, such as statements related to compliance with certain certifications or self-regulatory principles, concerning data privacy, security and AI. Regulators in the United States are increasingly scrutinizing these statements, and if these policies, materials or statements are found to be deficient, lacking in transparency, deceptive, unfair, misleading or misrepresentative of our practices, we may be subject to investigation, enforcement actions by regulators, or other adverse consequences. Obligations related to data privacy and security (and consumers' data privacy expectations) are quickly changing, becoming increasingly stringent and creating uncertainty. Additionally, these obligations may be subject to differing applications and interpretations, which may be inconsistent or conflict among jurisdictions. Preparing for and complying with these obligations requires us to devote significant resources, which may necessitate changes to our services, information technologies, systems, and practices and to those of any third parties that process personal data on our behalf. In addition, these obligations may require us to change our business model. We may at times fail (or be perceived to have failed) in our efforts to comply with our data privacy and security obligations. Moreover, despite our efforts, our personnel or third parties with whom we work may fail to comply with such obligations, which could negatively impact our business operations. If we or the third parties with whom we work fail, or are perceived to have failed, to address or comply with applicable data privacy and security obligations, we could face significant consequences, including but not limited to: government enforcement actions (e.g., investigations, fines, penalties, audits, inspections, and similar); litigation (including class-action claims) and mass arbitration demands; additional reporting requirements and/or oversight; bans or restrictions on processing personal data; orders to destroy or not use personal data; and imprisonment of company officials. In particular, plaintiffs have become increasingly more active in bringing privacy-related claims against companies, including class claims and mass arbitration demands. Some of these claims allow for the recovery of statutory damages on a per violation basis, and, if viable, carry the potential for monumental statutory damages, depending on the volume of data and the number of violations. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, or financial condition, including but not limited to: loss of customers; interruptions or stoppages in our business operations including, as relevant, clinical trials; inability to process personal data or to operate in certain jurisdictions; limited ability to develop or commercialize our products; expenditure of time and resources to defend any claim or inquiry; adverse publicity; or substantial changes to our business model or operations. We use generative AI to assist us in making certain decisions, which is regulated by certain privacy laws. Due to inaccuracies or flaws in the inputs, outputs, or logic of the AI technologies, the model could be biased and could lead us to make decisions that could bias certain individuals (or classes of individuals), and adversely impact their rights, employment, and ability to obtain certain pricing, products, services, or benefits. The development and use of AI technologies present various privacy and security risks that may impact our business. AI technologies are subject to privacy and data security laws, as well as increasing regulation and scrutiny. Our employees and personnel may use AI technologies to perform their work, and the disclosure and use of personal data in generative AI technologies is subject to various privacy laws and other privacy obligations. Governments have passed and are likely to pass additional laws and regulations which regulate generative AI. Our use of this technology could result in additional compliance costs, regulatory investigations and actions, and lawsuits. If we are unable to use generative AI, it could make our business less efficient and result in competitive disadvantages.

We are a domestic filer in the United States; however, we are incorporated and have our corporate headquarters in Canada. In addition, while many of our directors and officers reside in the United States, several of them reside outside of the United States. Accordingly, service of process upon us may be difficult to obtain within the United States. Furthermore, because substantially all of our assets are located outside the United States, any judgment obtained in the United States against us, including one predicated on the civil liability provisions of the U.S. federal securities laws, may not be collectible within the United States. Therefore, it may not be possible to enforce those actions against us. In addition, it may be difficult to assert U.S. securities law claims in original actions instituted in Canada. Canadian courts may refuse to hear a claim based on an alleged violation of U.S. securities laws against us or these persons on the grounds that Canada is not the most appropriate forum in which to bring such a claim. Even if a Canadian court agrees to hear a claim, it may determine that Canadian law and not U.S. law is applicable to the claim. If U.S. law is found to be applicable, the content of applicable U.S. law must be proved as a fact, which can be a time-consuming and costly process. Certain matters of procedure will also be governed by Canadian law. Furthermore, it may not be possible to subject foreign persons or entities to the jurisdiction of the courts in Canada. Similarly, to the extent that our assets are located in Canada, investors may have difficulty collecting from us any judgments obtained in the U.S. courts and predicated on the civil liability provisions of U.S. securities provisions.

A tax authority may disagree with tax positions that we have taken, which could result in increased tax liabilities. For example, the Canadian Revenue Agency, the IRS, or another tax authority could challenge our allocation of income by tax jurisdiction and the amounts paid between our affiliated companies pursuant to our intercompany arrangements and transfer pricing policies, including amounts paid with respect to our intellectual property development. Similarly, a tax authority could assert that we are subject to tax in a jurisdiction where we believe we have not established a taxable connection, often referred to as a "permanent establishment" under international tax treaties, and such an assertion, if successful, could increase our expected tax liability in one or more jurisdictions. A tax authority may take the position that material income tax liabilities, interest and penalties are payable by us, in which case, we expect that we might contest such assessment. Contesting such an assessment may be lengthy and costly and if we were unsuccessful in disputing the assessment, the result could increase our anticipated effective tax rate.

CARDAMYST, any subsequent etripamil indications and any other product candidates that receive marketing approval may fail to gain market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community. If such CARDAMYST, any subsequent etripamil indications or any future product candidates do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance, we may not generate significant drug revenue and may not become profitable. The degree of market acceptance of CARDAMYST, any subsequent etripamil indications or any future product candidates, if approved for commercial sale, will depend on a number of factors, including but not limited to third-party payors and others in the medical community. If such CARDAMYST, any subsequent etripamil indications or any future product candidates do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance, we may not generate significant drug revenue and may not become profitable. The degree of market acceptance of CARDAMYST, any subsequent etripamil indications or any future product candidates, if approved for commercial sale, will depend on a number of factors, including but not limited to: - the convenience and ease of administration compared to alternative treatments and therapies;- the willingness of the target patient population to try new therapies and of physicians to prescribe these therapies;- the efficacy and potential advantages compared to alternative treatments and therapies;- the effectiveness of sales and marketing efforts;- the prevalence and severity of any side effects;- the strength of our relationships with patient communities;- the cost of treatment in relation to alternative treatments and therapies, including any similar generic treatments;- our ability to offer such drug for sale at competitive prices;- the strength of marketing and distribution support; and - the availability of third-party coverage and adequate reimbursement; any restrictions on the use of the drug together with other medications; and the awareness and support from key opinion leaders in cardiology. Our efforts to educate physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community on the benefits of CARDAMYST, any subsequent etripamil indications or any future product candidates may require significant resources and may never be successful. Because we expect sales of CARDAMYST, any subsequent etripamil indications or any future product candidates, if approved, to generate substantially all of our revenues for the foreseeable future, the failure of these product candidates to find market acceptance would harm our business.

We are exposed to the risk of fraud or other misconduct by our employees, principal investigators, consultants, and commercial partners. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional failures to comply with FDA regulations or the regulations applicable in other jurisdictions, provide accurate information to the FDA and other regulatory authorities, comply with healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations in the United States and abroad, report financial information or data accurately, or disclose unauthorized activities to us. In particular, sales, marketing, and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, misconduct, kickbacks, self-dealing, and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs, and other business arrangements. Such misconduct also could involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical trials or interactions with the FDA or other regulatory authorities, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation. It is not always possible to identify and deter employee misconduct, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from government investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with these laws or regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could result in significant civil, criminal, and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from participating in government-funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, additional reporting requirements and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, contractual damages, reputational harm, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could have a negative impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

We have engaged CROs to conduct our Phase 2 clinical trial of etripamil for the treatment of AFib-RVR, and we expect to engage a CRO for future clinical trials of etripamil and any future product candidates. We do not currently have the ability to independently conduct any clinical trials. We rely on CROs and clinical trial sites to ensure the proper and timely conduct of our preclinical studies and clinical trials, and we expect to have limited influence over their actual performance. We rely upon CROs to monitor and manage data for our clinical programs, as well as the execution of future nonclinical studies. We expect to control only certain aspects of our CROs' activities. Nevertheless, we will be responsible for ensuring that each of our preclinical studies and clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards, and our reliance on the CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and our CROs are required to comply with good laboratory practices, or "GLPs," and GCPs, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities in the form of International Conference on Harmonization guidelines for any of our product candidates that are in preclinical and clinical development. Regulatory authorities enforce GCPs through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, principal investigators, and clinical trial sites. Although we rely on CROs to conduct GCP-compliant clinical trials, we remain responsible for ensuring that each of our GLP preclinical studies and clinical trials is conducted in accordance with its investigational plan, protocol, and applicable laws and regulations. Our reliance on the CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. If we or our CROs fail to comply with GCPs, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable, and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. Accordingly, if our CROs fail to comply with these regulations or fail to recruit a sufficient number of subjects, we may be required to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process. Our reliance on third parties to conduct clinical trials will result in less direct control over the management of data developed through clinical trials than would be the case if we were relying entirely upon our own staff. Any failure by third parties to prevent unauthorized access, use, or disclosure of data, including personal data regarding our patients or employees, could harm our reputation, cause us not to comply with federal and/or state breach notification laws and foreign law equivalents, and otherwise subject us to liability under laws and regulations that protect the privacy and security of personal data. Communicating with CROs and other third parties can be challenging, potentially leading to mistakes as well as difficulties in coordinating activities. Such parties may: - have staffing difficulties;- fail to comply with contractual obligations;- experience regulatory compliance issues;- experience business disruptions from public health emergencies; or - undergo changes in priorities or become financially distressed. These factors may materially adversely affect the willingness or ability of third parties to conduct our clinical trials and may subject us to unexpected cost increases that are beyond our control. If our CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations, fail to meet expected deadlines, fail to comply with regulatory requirements, or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols or regulatory requirements or for any other reasons, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed, or terminated, and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for, or successfully commercialize, any product candidate that we develop. As a result, our financial results and the commercial prospects for any product candidate that we develop would be harmed, our costs could increase, and our ability to generate revenue could be delayed. While we will have agreements governing their activities, our CROs will not be our employees, and we will not control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to our future clinical and nonclinical programs. These CROs may also have relationships with other commercial entities, including our competitors, for whom they may also be conducting clinical trials, or other drug development activities that could harm our business. We face the risk of potential unauthorized disclosure or misappropriation of our intellectual property by CROs, which may reduce our trade secret protection and allow our potential competitors to access and exploit our proprietary technology. If our relationship with any of these CROs terminates, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative CROs or do so on commercially reasonable terms. Switching or adding additional CROs involves substantial cost and requires management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new CRO commences work. As a result, delays occur, which can negatively affect our ability to meet our desired clinical development timelines. Though we intend to manage carefully our relationships with our CROs, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have a negative impact on our business, financial condition, and prospects. In addition, principal investigators for our clinical trials may serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us from time to time and receive compensation in connection with such services. Under certain circumstances, we may be required to report some of these relationships to the FDA. The FDA may conclude that a financial relationship between us and a principal investigator has created a conflict of interest or otherwise affected interpretation of the trial. The FDA 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 and may ultimately lead to the denial of marketing approval of etripamil and any future product candidates.

Our results of operations could be adversely affected by general conditions in the global economy. Unfavorable conditions in the economy both in the United States and abroad, including conditions resulting from changes in gross domestic product growth in the United States or abroad, financial and credit market fluctuations, inflation, fluctuating interest rates, international tariff policies, trade wars and other concerns regarding international trade relations, political turmoil, natural catastrophes, outbreaks of contagious diseases, geopolitical tensions, warfare and terrorist attacks, could cause a decrease in business investments, disrupt the timing and cadence of key industry events, and negatively affect the growth of our business and our results of operations. For example, the COVID-19 pandemic adversely affected workforces, economies and financial markets globally, leading to a reduction in the ability of, or the inability of, partners, suppliers, vendors or other parties to meet their contractual obligations, and for a period of time, a reduction in customer spending on technology, and such conditions may reoccur in the future. Geopolitical conflict, including wars, and the related political and economic responses thereto, such as sanctions, may also exacerbate these issues. A severe or prolonged economic downturn could result in a variety of risks to our business, including weakened demand for CARDAMYST, our product candidates and our ability to raise additional capital when needed on acceptable terms, if at all. A weak or declining economy could also strain our suppliers, possibly resulting in supply disruption, or cause delays in payments for our services by third-party payors or our collaborators. Any of the foregoing could harm our business and we cannot anticipate all of the ways in which the current economic climate and financial market conditions could adversely impact our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.