Sutro Biopharma (STRO) Risk Analysis

Our restated certificate of incorporation and our restated bylaws contain provisions that could delay or prevent a change in control of our company. These provisions could also make it difficult for stockholders to elect directors who are not nominated by current members of our board of directors or take other corporate actions, including effecting changes in our management. These provisions: - establish a classified board of directors so that not all members of our board are elected at one time;- permit only the board of directors to establish the number of directors and fill vacancies on the board;- provide that directors may only be removed "for cause" and only with the approval of two-thirds of our stockholders;- require super-majority voting to amend some provisions in our restated certificate of incorporation and restated bylaws;- authorize the issuance of "blank check" preferred stock that our board could use to implement a stockholder rights plan;- eliminate the ability of our stockholders to call special meetings of stockholders;- prohibit stockholder action by written consent, which requires all stockholder actions to be taken at a meeting of our stockholders;- prohibit cumulative voting; and - establish advance notice requirements for nominations for election to our board or for proposing matters that can be acted upon by stockholders at annual stockholder meetings. In addition, Section 203 of the DGCL may discourage, delay or prevent a change in control of our company. Section 203 imposes certain restrictions on mergers, business combinations and other transactions between us and holders of 15% or more of our common stock.

Our restated certificate of incorporation provides that, to the fullest extent permitted by law, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the exclusive forum for: any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf; any action asserting a breach of fiduciary duty; any action asserting a claim against us arising pursuant to the DGCL, our restated certificate of incorporation or our restated bylaws; or any action asserting a claim against us that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine. This exclusive forum provision does not apply to suits brought to enforce a duty or liability created by the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or Exchange Act. It could apply, however, to a suit that falls within one or more of the categories enumerated in the exclusive forum provision. This choice of forum provision may limit a stockholder's ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or any of our directors, officers, or other employees, or the underwriters of any offering giving rise to such claims, which may discourage lawsuits with respect to such claims. Alternatively, if a court were to find the choice of forum provisions contained in our restated certificate of incorporation to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could harm our business, results of operations and financial condition. Section 22 of the Securities Act, creates concurrent jurisdiction for federal and state courts over all claims brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Securities Act or the rules and regulations thereunder. Our restated bylaws provide that the federal district courts of the United States of America will, to the fullest extent permitted by law, be the exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act, or a Federal Forum Provision, including for all causes of action asserted against any defendant named in such complaint. For the avoidance of doubt, this provision is intended to benefit and may be enforced by us, our officers and directors, the underwriters to any offering giving rise to such complaint and any other professional entity whose profession gives authority to a statement made by that person or entity and who has prepared or certified any part of the documents underlying the offering. Our decision to adopt a Federal Forum Provision followed a decision by the Supreme Court of the State of Delaware holding that such provisions are facially valid under Delaware law. While federal or state courts may not follow the holding of the Delaware Supreme Court or may determine that the Federal Forum Provision should be enforced in a particular case, application of the Federal Forum Provision means that suits brought by our stockholders to enforce any duty or liability created by the Securities Act must be brought in federal court and cannot be brought in state court, and our stockholders cannot waive compliance with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder.

The trading price of our common stock may be highly volatile and subject to wide fluctuations in response to various factors, some of which we cannot control. As a result of this volatility, investors may not be able to sell their common stock at or above the purchase price. The market price for our common stock may be influenced by many factors, including the other risks described in this section and the following: - results of preclinical studies and clinical trials of our product candidates, or those of our competitors or our existing or future collaborators;- regulatory or legal developments in the United States and other countries, especially changes in laws or regulations applicable to our product candidates and the drug approval process;- the success of competitive products or technologies;- introductions and announcements of new products by us, our future commercialization partners, or our competitors, and the timing of these introductions or announcements;- actions taken by regulatory agencies with respect to our products, clinical studies, manufacturing process or sales and marketing terms;- actual or anticipated variations in our financial results or those of companies that are perceived to be similar to us;- the success of our efforts to acquire or in-license additional technologies, products or product candidates;- developments concerning current or future collaborations, including but not limited to those with our sources of manufacturing supply and our commercialization partners;- market conditions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology sectors;- general economic uncertainty and capital markets disruptions, including fluctuations in interest rates, a new U.S. presidential administration, another government shutdown, inflation, changes in tariffs and trade restrictions, potential instability, which have been substantially impacted by regional geopolitical instability due to the impact of geopolitical tensions and the ongoing military conflicts around the world;- any adverse impact of health pandemics, including on our clinical trials and clinical trial operations;- announcements by us or our competitors of significant acquisitions, strategic collaborations, joint ventures or capital commitments;- developments or disputes concerning patents or other proprietary rights, including patents, litigation matters and our ability to obtain patent protection for our product candidates and products;- our ability or inability to raise additional capital and the terms on which we raise it;- the recruitment or departure of key personnel;- changes in the structure of healthcare payment systems;- actual or anticipated changes in earnings estimates or changes in stock market analyst recommendations regarding our common stock, other comparable companies or our industry generally;- our failure or the failure of our competitors to meet analysts' projections or guidance that we or our competitors may give to the market;- fluctuations in the valuation of companies perceived by investors to be comparable to us;- announcement and expectation of additional financing efforts;- speculation in the press or investment community;- trading volume of our common stock;- sales of our common stock by us or our stockholders;- changes in accounting principles or tax laws;- terrorist acts, acts of war or periods of widespread civil unrest, including the ongoing armed conflicts around the world;- natural disasters, epidemics, pandemics or contagious diseases, and other calamities;- political instability; and - general economic, industry and market conditions. In addition, the stock market in general, and the markets for pharmaceutical, biopharmaceutical and biotechnology stocks in particular, have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have been often unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of the issuer. These broad market and industry factors may seriously harm the market price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance. The realization of any of the above risks or any of a broad range of other risks, including those described in this "Risk Factors" section, could have a dramatic and adverse impact on the market price of our common stock.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market could occur at any time. If our stockholders sell, or the market perceives that our stockholders intend to sell, substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market, the market price of our common stock could decline significantly. We cannot predict what effect, if any, sales of our shares in the public market or the availability of shares for sale will have on the market price of our common stock. However, future sales of substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market, including shares issued upon exercise of outstanding options or warrants, or the perception that such sales may occur, could adversely affect the market price of our common stock. For example, we are party to a Sales Agreement with Jefferies, pursuant to which, from time to time, we may offer and sell through Jefferies common stock pursuant to one or more "at the market" offerings. Sales of our common stock under the Sales Agreement could be subject to business, economic or competitive uncertainties and contingencies, many of which may be beyond our control, and which could cause actual results from the sale of our common stock to differ materially from expectations. Any future sales of common stock through our "at the market" offering program will result in dilution and may have a negative impact on the price of our common stock. We also expect that significant additional capital may be needed in the future to continue our planned operations. To raise capital, we may sell common stock, convertible securities or other equity securities in one or more transactions at prices and in a manner we determine from time to time. These sales, or the perception in the market that the holders of a large number of shares intend to sell shares, could reduce the market price of our common stock. General Risk Factors

We have never declared or paid cash dividends on our capital stock. We currently intend to retain all of our future earnings, if any, to finance the growth and development of our business. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, of our common stock will be your sole source of gain for the foreseeable future.

Under current law, our net operating loss carryforwards generated in tax years ending on or prior to December 31, 2017, are permitted to be carried forward for 20 years and our federal net operating losses generated in tax years beginning after December 31, 2017, may be carried forward indefinitely, but the deductibility of such federal net operating losses, is limited to 80% of taxable income (without regard to certain deductions). In addition, under Section 382 of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and corresponding provisions of state law, if we experience an "ownership change" which is generally defined as a greater than 50% change, by value, in our equity ownership over a three-year period, our ability to use our pre-change net operating loss carryforwards to offset our post-change income may be limited. Based on Section 382 studies performed for certain prior periods, we experienced ownership change on each of November 20, 2019 and December 31, 2022, which imposed limitations on the use of our net operating losses arising before those dates. In addition, we may have experienced other ownership changes in the past and may experience ownership changes in the future as a result of equity offerings or other shifts in our stock ownership, some of which are outside our control. As a result, our use of federal NOL carryforwards could be further limited. State net operating loss carryforwards may be similarly limited. In addition, at the state level, there may be periods during which the use of net operating losses is suspended or otherwise limited, which could accelerate or permanently increase state taxes owed. Any such limitations may result in greater tax liabilities than we would incur in the absence of such limitations and any increased liabilities could adversely affect our business, results of operations, financial position and cash flows.

Generally accepted accounting principles in the United States, or U.S. GAAP, are subject to interpretation by the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, the SEC and various bodies formed to promulgate and interpret appropriate accounting principles. For example, in May 2014, the FASB issued accounting standards update No. 2014-09 (Topic 606), Revenue from Contracts with Customers, which supersedes nearly all existing revenue recognition guidance under U.S. GAAP. We adopted this new accounting standard as of January 1, 2019. Any difficulties in implementing this guidance could cause us to fail to meet our financial reporting obligations, which could result in regulatory discipline and harm investors' confidence in us. Additionally, the implementation of this guidance or a change in other principles or interpretations could have a significant effect on our financial results, and could affect the reporting of transactions completed before the announcement of a change.

We regularly maintain cash balances at third-party financial institutions in excess of the FDIC insurance limit and similar regulatory insurance limits outside the United States, and governments may not guarantee all depositors if such financial institutions were to fail, in the event of bank closures and instability in the global banking system. Any future adverse developments in the global banking system could directly or indirectly negatively impact our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Further, if we enter into a credit, loan or other similar facility with a financial institution, certain covenants included in such facility may require as security that we keep a significant portion of our cash with the institution providing such facility. If a depository institution where we maintain deposits fails or is subject to adverse conditions in the financial or credit markets, we may not be able to recover all, if any, of our deposits, which could adversely impact our operating liquidity and financial performance.

As of December 31, 2025, we had 137 full-time employees. As our development and commercialization plans and strategies develop, we expect to expand our employee base for managerial, operational, financial and other resources. In addition, we have limited experience in product development. As our product candidates enter and advance through preclinical studies and clinical trials, we will need to expand our development, regulatory and manufacturing capabilities or contract with other organizations to provide these capabilities for us. In the future, we expect to have to manage additional relationships with collaborators or partners, suppliers and other organizations. Our ability to manage our operations and future growth will require us to continue to improve our operational, financial and management controls, reporting systems and procedures. We may not be able to implement improvements to our management information and control systems in an efficient or timely manner and may discover deficiencies in existing systems and controls. Our inability to successfully manage our growth and expand our operations could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Since 2014, we have entered into several collaborations to develop and commercialize certain cancer and other therapeutics. Our XpressCF and XpressCF+ platforms have also supported a spin-out company, now known as Vaxcyte Inc., focused on discovery and development of vaccines for the treatment and prophylaxis of infectious disease. In addition, we may in the future seek third-party collaborators for research, development and commercialization of other therapeutic technologies or product candidates. Biopharmaceutical companies have been, and will likely continue to be, our principal partners for marketing, distribution, development, licensing and broader collaboration arrangements. Under our existing collaboration agreements, and we expect, any future collaboration agreements, our ability to influence the amount and timing of resources that our collaborators dedicate to the development or commercialization of our product candidates is, and will likely remain, limited. Moreover, our ability to generate revenues from these arrangements will depend on our collaborators' abilities to successfully perform the functions assigned to them in these arrangements. Collaborations involving our product candidates currently pose, and will continue to pose, the following risks to us: - collaborators have significant discretion in determining the efforts and resources that they will apply to these collaborations;- collaborators may not pursue development and commercialization of our product candidates or may elect not to continue or renew development or commercialization programs based on preclinical studies or clinical trial results, changes in the collaborators' strategic focus or available funding, or other external factors such as an acquisition that diverts resources or creates competing priorities;- collaborators may delay clinical trials, provide insufficient funding for a clinical trial program, stop a clinical trial or abandon a product candidate, repeat or conduct new clinical trials or require a new formulation of a product candidate for clinical testing;- collaborators could independently develop, or develop with third parties, products that compete directly or indirectly with our product candidates if the collaborators believe that competitive products are more likely to be successfully developed or can be commercialized under terms that are more economically attractive than ours;- collaborators with marketing and distribution rights to one or more products may not commit sufficient resources to the marketing and distribution of such product or products;- collaborators may not properly maintain or defend our intellectual property rights or may use our proprietary information in such a way as to invite litigation that could jeopardize or invalidate our intellectual property or proprietary information or expose us to litigation or potential liability;- collaborators may infringe the intellectual property rights of third parties, which may expose us to litigation and potential liability;- disputes may arise between the collaborators and us that result in the delay or termination of the research, development or commercialization of our product candidates or that result in costly litigation or arbitration that diverts management attention and resources; and - collaborations may be terminated and, if terminated, may result in a need for additional capital to pursue further development or commercialization of the applicable product candidates. As a result of the foregoing, our current and any future collaboration agreements may not lead to development or commercialization of our product candidates in the most efficient manner or at all. Moreover, if a collaborator of ours were to be involved in a business combination, the continued pursuit and emphasis on our product development or commercialization program could be delayed, diminished or terminated. Any failure to successfully develop or commercialize our product candidates pursuant to our current or any future collaboration agreements could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

From time to time, we may consider strategic transactions, such as additional collaborations, acquisitions of companies, asset purchases or sales and out- or in-licensing of product candidates or technologies that we believe will complement or augment our existing business. In particular, we will evaluate and, if strategically attractive, seek to enter into additional collaborations, including with major biotechnology or biopharmaceutical companies. The competition for collaborators is intense, and the negotiation process is time-consuming and complex. Any new collaboration may be on terms that are not optimal for us, and we may not be able to maintain any new collaboration if, for example, development or approval of a product candidate is delayed, sales of an approved product candidate do not meet expectations, or the collaborator terminates the collaboration. In addition, there have been a significant number of recent business combinations among large pharmaceutical companies that have resulted in a reduced number of potential future strategic partners. Additionally, antitrust or other competition laws including increased enforcement within the United States in the healthcare space may also limit our ability to enter into collaborations with certain businesses or to fully realize the benefits of strategic transactions. Our ability to reach a definitive agreement for a collaboration will depend, among other things, upon our assessment of the strategic partner's resources and expertise, the terms and conditions of the proposed collaboration and the proposed strategic partner's evaluation of a number of factors. These factors may include the design or results of clinical trials, the likelihood of approval by the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside the United States, the potential market for the subject product candidate, the costs and complexities of manufacturing and delivering such product candidate to patients, the potential of competing products, the existence of uncertainty with respect to our ownership of technology, which can exist if there is a challenge to such ownership, without regard to the merits of the challenge, and industry and market conditions generally. Moreover, if we acquire assets with promising markets or technologies, we may not be able to realize the benefit of acquiring such assets due to an inability to successfully integrate them with our existing technologies and may encounter numerous difficulties in developing, manufacturing and marketing any new products resulting from a strategic acquisition that delay or prevent us from realizing their expected benefits or enhancing our business. We cannot assure you that following any such collaboration, or other strategic transaction, we will achieve the expected synergies to justify the transaction. For example, such transactions may require us to incur non-recurring or other charges, increase our near- and long-term expenditures and pose significant integration or implementation challenges or disrupt our management or business. These transactions would entail numerous operational and financial risks, including exposure to unknown liabilities, disruption of our business and diversion of our management's time and attention in order to manage a collaboration or develop acquired products, product candidates or technologies, incurrence of substantial debt or dilutive issuances of equity securities to pay transaction consideration or costs, higher than expected collaboration, acquisition or integration costs, write-downs of assets or goodwill or impairment charges, increased amortization expenses, difficulty and cost in facilitating the collaboration or combining the operations and personnel of any acquired business, impairment of relationships with key suppliers, manufacturers or customers of any acquired business due to changes in management and ownership and the inability to retain key employees of any acquired business. Accordingly, although there can be no assurance that we will undertake or successfully complete any transactions of the nature described above, any transactions that we do complete may be subject to the foregoing or other risks and would have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Conversely, any failure to enter any additional collaboration or other strategic transaction that would be beneficial to us could delay the development and potential commercialization of our product candidates and have a negative impact on the competitiveness of any product candidate that reaches market.

If companion diagnostics are developed in conjunction with clinical programs, the FDA may require regulatory approval of a companion diagnostic as a condition to approval of the product candidate. Companion diagnostics are subject to regulation by the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities as medical devices and require separate regulatory approval or clearance prior to commercialization. To approve a companion diagnostic or the associated product candidate, FDA may require clinical data demonstrating that the diagnostic can reliably identify patients who are most likely to benefit from the therapeutic product. We may also be required to demonstrate the predictive utility of the companion diagnostic to the FDA. Specifically, we must demonstrate the way in which the diagnostic selects patients for whom the biologic therapy will be effective or more effective compared to patients not selected by the diagnostic. If we or our collaborators, or any third party, are unable to successfully develop companion diagnostics for our product candidates, or experience delays in doing so: - the development of our product candidates may be adversely affected if we are unable to appropriately select patients for enrollment in our planned clinical trials;- our product candidates may not receive marketing approval if their safe and effective use depends on a companion diagnostic, or, though our product candidate may be authorized, we may not be able to commercialize effectively until authorization of a companion diagnostic; and - we may not realize the full commercial potential of any product candidates that receive marketing approval if, among other reasons, we are unable to appropriately identify patients with the specific patient selection criteria targeted by our product candidates. In addition, although we believe genetic testing and other patient selection schema are becoming more prevalent in the diagnosis and treatment of various diseases and conditions, our product candidates may be perceived negatively compared to alternative treatments that do not require the use of companion diagnostics, either due to the additional cost of the companion diagnostic or the need to complete additional procedures to identify genetic markers prior to administering our product candidates. If any of these events were to occur, our business would be harmed, possibly materially.

Before we may initiate a clinical trial or commercialize any of our product candidates, we must demonstrate to the FDA that the chemistry, manufacturing and controls for our product candidates meet applicable requirements, and in the European Union, or EU, a manufacturing authorization must be obtained from the appropriate EU regulatory authorities. The FDA has allowed our cell-free product candidates, and others of our or our partners' product candidates, to proceed through clinical trials; however, because no product manufactured on a cell-free manufacturing platform has yet been approved in the United States, there is no manufacturing facility that has demonstrated the ability to comply with FDA requirements for later stage clinical development or commercialization, and, therefore, the timeframe for demonstrating compliance to the FDA's satisfaction is uncertain. Despite completed technology transfers to our contract manufacturing organization, we could still experience unexpected or unplanned supply chain issues that may delay or disrupt our development efforts. We have conducted technology transfers to enable large scale manufacture of extract and the reagents necessary to manufacture our products using our XpressCF and XpressCF+ platforms and are likely to conduct additional similar technology transfers in the future. These large-scale technology transfers may fail or be delayed, resulting in impacts to our development timelines and the costs associated with manufacturing our development products.

Before we can begin to commercially manufacture our product candidates, we must obtain regulatory approval from the FDA for a BLA that describes in detail the chemistry, manufacturing, and controls for the product. A manufacturing authorization must also be obtained from the appropriate EU regulatory authorities. The timeframe required to obtain such approval or authorization is uncertain. In addition, we must pass a pre-approval inspection of the applicable manufacturing facility by the FDA before any of our product candidates can obtain marketing approval, if ever. In order to obtain approval, we will need to ensure that all of our processes, methods and equipment are compliant with cGMP, and perform extensive audits of vendors, contract laboratories and suppliers. If any of our vendors, contract laboratories or suppliers is found to be out of compliance with cGMP, we may experience delays or disruptions in manufacturing while we work with these third parties to remedy the violation or while we work to identify suitable replacement vendors. The cGMP requirements govern quality control of the manufacturing process and documentation policies and procedures. In complying with cGMP, we will be obligated to expend time, money and effort in production, record keeping and quality control to assure that the product meets applicable specifications and other requirements. If we fail to comply with these requirements, we would be subject to possible regulatory action and may not be permitted to sell any products that we may develop.

The ability of the FDA to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, statutory, regulatory and policy changes, the FDA's ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment for and facilitate the renewal of user fee programs, and other events that may otherwise affect the FDA's ability to perform routine functions. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable. Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies, including as a result of government shutdowns, may also slow the time necessary for new drugs to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. Moreover, FDA-regulated industries, such as ours, face uncertainty with regard to the regulatory environment we will face under the current administration (the "Administration") as we proceed with research and development and potential future commercialization. Some of the Administration's efforts have manifested to date as efforts to reduce the size of the federal government, including large-scale reductions in force at FDA. The loss of key personnel at the FDA, including those in leadership positions, is likely to impact operations at the FDA, which could result in, among other things, delays or limitations on our ability to obtain guidance from the FDA on our product candidates in development, longer review times, and delays in obtaining regulatory approvals for our product candidates. There remains general uncertainty regarding future activities. New executive orders, regulations, policies or guidance could be issued or promulgated that adversely affect us or create a more challenging or costly environment to pursue the development of new therapeutic products. Pressures on and uncertainty surrounding the U.S. federal government's budget and potential changes in budgetary priorities could adversely affect the funding for existing programs and grants and increase the costs to us of conducting clinical trials. Alternatively, state governments may attempt to address or react to changes at the federal level with changes to their own regulatory frameworks in a manner that is adverse to our operations. If we or our collaborators become negatively impacted by future governmental orders, regulations, policies or guidance, there could be a material adverse effect on us and our business. We also cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative or executive action, either in the United States or abroad. Further, recent decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court have limited judicial deference to regulatory agencies, including the FDA. As a result of these decisions, existing agency regulations, policies, and long-standing decisions may become subject to legal challenges, which may impact the FDA's authority, lead to uncertainties in the industry, and disrupt the FDA's normal operations, all of which could impact the timely review of any regulatory filings or applications we submit to the FDA. Further, if another prolonged government shutdown occurs, or if global health concerns prevent the FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA or other regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

U.S. and foreign anti-corruption, anti-money laundering, export control, sanctions and other trade laws and regulations prohibit, among other things, companies and their employees, agents, CROs, CMOs, legal counsel, accountants, consultants, contractors and other partners from authorizing, promising, offering, providing, soliciting, or making or receiving directly or indirectly, corrupt or improper payments or anything else of value to or from recipients in the public or private sector. Violations of these laws can result in substantial criminal fines and civil penalties, imprisonment, the loss of trade privileges, debarment, tax reassessments, breach of contract and fraud litigation, reputational harm and other consequences. We have direct or indirect interactions with officials and employees of government agencies or government-affiliated hospitals, universities and other organizations. We also expect our non-U.S. activities to increase over time. We expect to rely on third parties for research, preclinical studies and clinical trials and/or to obtain necessary permits, licenses, patent registrations and other marketing authorizations. We can be held liable for corrupt or other illegal activities of our personnel, agents, or partners, even if we do not explicitly authorize or have prior knowledge of such activities. Any violations of the laws and regulations described above may result in substantial civil and criminal fines and penalties, imprisonment, the loss of export or import privileges, debarment, tax reassessments, breach of contract and fraud litigation, reputational harm and other consequences.

In the future, we may decide to pursue accelerated approval for one or more of our product candidates. Under the FDA's accelerated approval program, the FDA may approve a drug or biologic for a serious or life-threatening disease or condition that addresses an unmet medical need based upon a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. For drugs or biologics granted accelerated approval, post-marketing confirmatory trials are required to verify and describe the anticipated effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. These confirmatory trials must be completed with due diligence, and the FDA may require that the trial be designed, initiated, and/or fully enrolled prior to approval. If we were to pursue accelerated approval for a product candidate for a disease or condition, we would do so on the basis that there is no available therapy for that disease or condition or that our product candidate otherwise addresses an unmet medical need. If standard of care were to evolve or if any of our competitors were to receive full approval on the basis of a confirmatory trial for a drug or biologic for a disease or condition for which we are seeking accelerated approval before we receive accelerated approval, the disease or condition would no longer qualify as one for which there is no available therapy, and accelerated approval of our product candidate would not occur without a showing that it addresses an unmet medical need. Many cancer therapies rely on accelerated approval, and the treatment landscape can change quickly as the FDA converts accelerated approvals to full approvals on the basis of successful confirmatory trials. Whether any trial is sufficient to receive FDA approval under the accelerated approval pathway will depend on the design and safety and efficacy results of such trial and will only be determined by the FDA upon review of the trial design and a submitted BLA. Moreover, the FDA may withdraw approval of any product candidate approved under the accelerated approval pathway if, for example: - the trial or trials required to verify the predicted clinical benefit of our product candidate fail to verify such benefit or do not demonstrate sufficient clinical benefit to justify the risks associated with such product;- other evidence demonstrates that our product candidate is not shown to be safe or effective under the conditions of use;- we fail to conduct any required post-approval trial of our product candidate with due diligence; or - we disseminate false or misleading promotional materials relating to the relevant product candidate. In addition, the FDA may terminate the accelerated approval program or change the standards under which accelerated approvals are considered and granted in response to public pressure or other concerns regarding the accelerated approval program. Changes to or termination of the accelerated approval program could prevent or limit our ability to obtain accelerated approval of any of our clinical development programs. Recently, the accelerated approval pathway has come under scrutiny within the FDA and by Congress. The FDA has put increased focus on ensuring that confirmatory studies are conducted with diligence and, ultimately, that such studies confirm the benefit. For example, the FDA has convened its Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee to review what the FDA has called "dangling" or delinquent accelerated approvals, where confirmatory studies have not been completed or where results did not confirm benefit, but for which marketing approval continues in effect, and some companies have subsequently voluntarily requested withdrawal of approval of their products. In addition, the Oncology Center of Excellence has announced Project Confirm, which is an initiative to promote the transparency of outcomes related to accelerated approvals for oncology indications and provide a framework to foster discussion, research and innovation in approval and post-marketing processes, with the goal to enhance the balance of access and verification of benefit for therapies available to patients with cancer and hematologic malignancies. Further, the FDA is authorized to require a post-approval study to be underway prior to approval or within a specified time period following approval. The FDA must also specify conditions of any required post-approval study, which may include milestones such as a target date of study completion. Sponsors must submit progress reports for required post-approval studies and any conditions required by the FDA not later than 180 days following approval and not less frequently than every 180 days thereafter until completion or termination of the study. The FDA can initiate an enforcement action for the failure to conduct with due diligence a required post-approval study, including a failure to meet any required conditions specified by the FDA or to submit timely reports.

Our product candidates are subject to extensive governmental regulations relating to, among other things, research, testing, development, manufacturing, safety, efficacy, approval, recordkeeping, reporting, labeling, storage, packaging, advertising and promotion, pricing, marketing and distribution of drugs and therapeutic biologics. Rigorous preclinical testing and clinical trials and an extensive regulatory approval process are required to be completed successfully in the United States and in many foreign jurisdictions before a new drug or therapeutic biologic can be marketed. Satisfaction of these and other regulatory requirements is costly, time consuming, uncertain and subject to unanticipated delays. It is possible that none of the product candidates we may develop, either alone or with our collaborators, will obtain the regulatory approvals necessary for us or our existing or future collaborators to begin selling them. Although some of our employees have experience in conducting and managing clinical trials from prior employment at other companies, we, as a company, have little prior experience in conducting and managing the clinical trials necessary to obtain regulatory approvals, including approval by the FDA. The time required to obtain FDA and other approvals is unpredictable but typically takes many years following the commencement of the initial clinical trials, depending upon the type, complexity and novelty of the product candidate and the availability of applicable government resources. The standards that the FDA and its foreign counterparts use when regulating us require judgment and can change, which makes it difficult to predict with certainty their application. Any analysis we perform of data from preclinical and clinical activities is subject to confirmation and interpretation by regulatory authorities, which could delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. We or our collaborators may also encounter unexpected delays or increased costs due to new government regulations, for example, from future legislation or administrative action, or from changes in FDA policy during the period of product development, clinical trials and FDA regulatory review. It is impossible to predict whether legislative changes will be enacted, or whether FDA or foreign regulations, guidance or interpretations will be changed, or the impact of such changes, if any. For example, the Oncology Center of Excellence within the FDA has advanced Project Optimus, which is an initiative to reform the dose optimization and dose selection paradigm in oncology drug development to emphasize selection of an optimal dose, which is a dose or doses that maximizes not only the efficacy of a drug but the safety and tolerability as well. This shift from the prior approach, which generally determined the maximum tolerated dose, may require sponsors to spend additional time and resources to further explore a product candidate's dose-response relationship to facilitate optimum dose selection in a target population. Other Oncology Center of Excellence initiatives have included Project FrontRunner, an initiative with a goal of developing a framework for identifying candidate drugs for initial clinical development in the earlier advanced setting rather than for treatment of patients who have received numerous prior lines of therapies or have exhausted available treatment options. We are considering these policy changes as they relate to our programs. We may also be affected by ex-US regulatory requirements, given that our trials may be conducted globally; current and unforeseen new EU-specific clinical trial conduct regulations, such as the In Vitro Diagnostic Regulation, or IVDR, and GDPR, may delay, or increase the difficulty and expense of conducting, our clinical studies. Given that the product candidates we are developing, either alone or with our collaborators, represent a new approach to the manufacturing and type of therapeutic biologics, the FDA and its foreign counterparts have not yet established definitive policies, practices or guidelines in relation to these product candidates. Moreover, the FDA may respond to any BLA that we may submit by defining requirements that we do not anticipate. Such responses could delay clinical development of our product candidates. Furthermore, in recent years, there has been increased public and political pressure on the FDA with respect to the approval process for new drugs and therapeutic biologics, and FDA standards, especially regarding product safety, appear to have become more stringent. Any delay or failure in obtaining required approvals could have a material and adverse effect on our ability to generate revenues from the particular product candidate for which we are seeking approval. Furthermore, any regulatory approval to market a product may be subject to limitations on the approved uses for which we may market the product or on the labeling or other restrictions. In addition, the FDA has the authority to require a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy, or REMS, as part of a BLA or after approval, which may impose further requirements or restrictions on the distribution or use of an approved biologic, such as limiting prescribing to certain physicians or medical centers that have undergone specialized training, limiting treatment to patients who meet certain safe-use criteria and requiring treated patients to enroll in a registry. These limitations and restrictions may limit the size of the market for the product and affect reimbursement by third-party payors. We are also subject to numerous foreign regulatory requirements governing, among other things, the conduct of clinical trials, manufacturing and marketing authorization, pricing and third-party reimbursement. The foreign regulatory approval process varies among countries and may include all of the risks associated with FDA approval process described above, as well as additional risks attributable to the satisfaction of local regulations in foreign jurisdictions. Moreover, the time required to obtain approval may differ from that required to obtain FDA approval. FDA approval does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities outside the United States and vice versa. From time to time during the development and regulatory approval process for our therapeutic candidates, we engage in discussions with the FDA and other regulatory authorities regarding our development programs, including discussions about the regulatory requirements for approval. Sometimes different regulatory authorities provide different or conflicting advice. While we attempt to harmonize the advice we receive from multiple regulatory authorities, it is not always practical to do so. Also, we may choose not to harmonize conflicting advice when harmonization would significantly delay clinical trial data or when we believe it is otherwise inappropriate. In addition, regulatory authorities may change their views on aspects of the clinical programs, including study designs, or the ability of the studies as designed to support approval of a product. If we are unable to effectively and efficiently resolve and comply with the inquiries and requests of the FDA and other regulatory authorities, the approval of our therapeutic candidates may be delayed and their value may be reduced. Any delay or failure to obtain U.S. or foreign regulatory approval for a product candidate could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Any regulatory approvals that we or our existing or future collaborators obtain for our product candidates may also be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which a product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing, including Phase 4 clinical trials, and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate. In addition, if the FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority approves any of our product candidates, the manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, storage, import, export, advertising, promotion and recordkeeping for the product will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. The FDA has significant post-market authority, including the authority to require labeling changes based on new safety information and to require post-market studies or clinical trials to evaluate safety risks related to the use of a product or to require withdrawal of the product from the market. The FDA also has the authority to require a REMS after approval, which may impose further requirements or restrictions on the distribution or use of an approved drug or therapeutic biologic. The manufacturing facilities we use to make a future product, if any, will also be subject to periodic review and inspection by the FDA and other regulatory agencies, including for continued compliance with cGMP requirements. The discovery of any new or previously unknown problems with our third-party manufacturers, manufacturing processes, materials for product manufacture, or facilities may result in restrictions on the product, manufacturer or facility, including withdrawal of the product from the market. If we rely on third-party manufacturers, we will not have control over compliance with applicable rules and regulations by such manufacturers. Any product promotion and advertising will also be subject to regulatory requirements and continuing regulatory review. If we or our existing or future collaborators, manufacturers or service providers fail to comply with applicable continuing regulatory requirements in the United States or foreign jurisdictions in which we seek to market our products, we or they may be subject to, among other things, fines, warning letters, holds on clinical trials, delay of approval or refusal by the FDA or similar foreign regulatory bodies to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications, suspension or withdrawal of regulatory approval, product recalls and seizures, administrative detention of products, refusal to permit the import or export of products, operating restrictions, injunction, civil penalties and criminal prosecution. Subsequent discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with our third-party manufacturers or manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in, among other things: - restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of the product, withdrawal of the product from the market or voluntary or mandatory product recalls;- fines, warning or untitled letters or holds on clinical trials;- refusal by the FDA to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications filed by us or our strategic partners;- suspension or revocation of product license approvals;- product seizure or detention or refusal to permit the import or export of products; and - injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties. The FDA policies may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability, which would adversely affect our business.

Existing regulatory policies may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could affect pricing and third-party payments for our product candidates, which could negatively affect our business, financial condition and prospects. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability. In the United States, there have been and continue to be a number of legislative initiatives to contain healthcare costs. For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Healthcare and Education Reconciliation Act, or together, the ACA, was enacted, which substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers, and significantly impacts the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. Since the ACA was enacted, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States federal and state levels to reduce healthcare expenditures, including the Budget Control Act, which, subject to certain temporary suspension periods, imposed 2% reductions in Medicare payments to providers per fiscal year starting April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, that will remain in effect through 2032, unless additional Congressional action is taken, and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which added a requirement for manufacturers of certain single-source drugs (including biologics and biosimilars) separately paid for under Medicare Part B for at least 18 months and marketed in single-dose containers or packages (known as refundable single-dose containers or single-use package drugs) to provide annual refunds for any portions of the dispensed drug that are unused and discarded if those unused or discarded portions exceed an applicable percentage defined by statute or regulation. Further, in November 2020, the HHS finalized a regulation removing safe harbor protection for price reductions from pharmaceutical manufacturers to plan sponsors under Part D, either directly or through pharmacy benefit managers, unless the price reduction is required by law. The rule also creates a new safe harbor for price reductions reflected at the point-of-sale, as well as a safe harbor for certain fixed fee arrangements between pharmacy benefit managers and manufacturers. The implementation of this final rule was delayed by the IRA until January 1, 2032. Under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, effective January 1, 2024, the statutory cap on Medicaid Drug Rebate Program rebates that manufacturers pay to state Medicaid programs has been eliminated. Elimination of this cap has, in some instances, required pharmaceutical manufacturers to pay more in rebates than they have received on the sale of products. Moreover, on January 2, 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. In November 2024, CMS issued a final rule, that decreased Medicare reimbursement for physician services by 2.8%, effective January 1, 2025. If federal spending is further reduced, anticipated budgetary shortfalls may also impact the ability of relevant agencies, such as the FDA or the National Institutes of Health to continue to function at current levels. Amounts allocated to federal grants and contracts may be reduced or eliminated. These reductions may also impact the ability of relevant agencies to timely review and approve research and development, manufacturing, and marketing activities, which may delay our ability to develop, market and sell any products we may develop. Moreover, payment methodologies, including payment for companion diagnostics, may be subject to changes in healthcare legislation and regulatory initiatives. CMS bundles the Medicare payments for certain laboratory tests ordered while a patient received services in a hospital outpatient setting and CMS pays for clinical laboratory services based on a weighted average of reported prices that private payors, Medicare Advantage plans, and Medicaid Managed Care plans pay for laboratory services. Further, on March 16, 2018, CMS finalized its National Coverage Determination, or NCD, for certain diagnostic laboratory tests using next generation sequencing that are approved by the FDA as a companion in vitro diagnostic and used in a cancer with an FDA-approved companion diagnostic indication. Under the NCD, diagnostic tests that gain FDA approval or clearance as an in vitro companion diagnostic will automatically receive full coverage and be available for patients with recurrent, metastatic relapsed, refractory or stages III and IV cancer. Additionally, the NCD extended coverage to repeat testing when the patient has a new primary diagnosis of cancer. There has been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several presidential executive orders, Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. Additionally, several healthcare reform initiatives culminated in the enactment of the IRA in August 2022, which, among other things, requires HHS to directly negotiate the selling price of a statutorily specified number of drugs and biologics each year that CMS reimburses under Medicare Part B and Part D. The negotiated price may not exceed a statutory ceiling price. Only high-expenditure single-source biologics that have been approved for at least 11 years (7 years for single-source drugs) can qualify for negotiations, with the negotiated price taking effect two years after the selection year. For 2026, the first year in which negotiated prices become effective, CMS selected 10 high-cost Medicare Part D products in 2023, negotiations began in 2024, and the negotiated maximum fair price for each product has been announced. These negotiations resulted in significant price reductions for the products from their 2023 list prices, ranging from 38 to 79 percent, with an average price reduction of 59.4 percent. CMS has selected and announced the negotiated maximum fair price for 15 additional Medicare Part D drugs, which will become effective in 2027. For 2028, CMS has selected an additional 15 drugs, comprised of drugs covered under Medicare Part D and, for the first time, drugs payable under Medicare Part B. For 2029 and subsequent years, 20 Part B or Part D drugs will be selected. A drug or biological product that has an orphan drug designation for only one rare disease or condition will be excluded from the IRA's price negotiations requirements, but loses that exclusion if it has designations for more than one rare disease or condition, or if it is approved for an indication that is not within that single designated rare disease or condition, unless such additional designation or such disqualifying approvals are withdrawn by the time CMS evaluates the drug for selection for negotiation. However, as a result of a statutory amendment enacted in July 2025, beginning with the 2028 negotiated price applicability year, a drug may be designated for more than one rare disease or condition and still be excluded from price negotiation, as long as the only approved indications are for such rare diseases or conditions. The IRA also imposes rebates on Medicare Part D and Part B drugs whose prices have increased at a rate greater than the rate of inflation, and in November 2024, CMS finalized regulations for the Medicare Part D and Part B inflation rebates. In addition, the law eliminates the "donut hole" under Medicare Part D beginning in 2025 by significantly lowering the enrollee maximum out-of-pocket cost and requiring manufacturers to subsidize, through a newly established manufacturer discount program, 10% of Part D enrollees' prescription costs for brand drugs below the out-of-pocket maximum, and 20% once the out-of-pocket maximum has been reached. The IRA permits the Secretary of HHS to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. Manufacturers that fail to comply with the IRA may be subject to various penalties, some significant, including civil monetary penalties. Further, In July 2025, the OBBBA was signed into law. The OBBBA is expected to reduce Medicaid spending and enrollment by implementing work requirements for some beneficiaries, capping state-directed payments, reducing federal funding, and limiting provider taxes used to fund the program. The OBBBA also narrows access to ACA marketplace exchange enrollment and declined to extend the enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in ACA marketplaces, which expired in 2025. These provisions may be subject to legal challenges. For example, the provisions related to the negotiation of selling prices of high-expenditure single-source drugs and biologics have been challenged in multiple lawsuits brought by pharmaceutical manufacturers. Thus, while it is unclear how the IRA will be implemented, it will likely have a significant impact on the pharmaceutical industry and our product candidates. At the state level, legislatures are increasingly enacting laws and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. For example, the FDA released a final rule in September 2020 providing guidance for states to build and submit importation plans for drugs from Canada, and the FDA authorized the first such plan in January 2024, which has been extended until May 2026. It is unclear how this program will be implemented, including which drugs will be chosen, and whether it will be subject to legal challenges in the United States or Canada. Other states have also submitted proposals that are pending review by the FDA. Additionally, on May 30, 2018, the Trickett Wendler, Frank Mongiello, Jordan McLinn, and Matthew Bellina Right to Try Act of 2017 was signed into law. The law, among other things, provides a federal framework for certain patients to access certain investigational new drug products that have completed a Phase 1 clinical trial and that are undergoing investigation for FDA approval. Under certain circumstances, eligible patients can seek treatment without enrolling in clinical trials and without obtaining FDA authorization under an FDA expanded access program; however, manufacturers are not obligated to provide investigational new drug products under the current federal right to try law. We may choose to seek an expanded access program for our product candidates, or to utilize comparable rules in other countries that allow the use of a drug, on a named patient basis or under a compassionate use program. We expect that the ACA, the IRA, the OBBBA and other state or federal healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability, or commercialize our products.

We currently have a limited team for the marketing, sales and distribution of any of our product candidates that are able to obtain regulatory approval. To commercialize any product candidates after approval, we must build, on a territory-by-territory basis, marketing, sales, distribution, managerial and other non-technical capabilities or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services, and we may not be successful in doing so. If our product candidates receive regulatory approval, we may decide to establish a sales or marketing team with technical expertise and supporting distribution capabilities to commercialize our product candidates, which will be expensive and time consuming and will require significant attention of our executive officers to manage. For example, some state and local jurisdictions have licensing and continuing education requirements for pharmaceutical sales representatives, which requires time and financial resources. Any failure or delay in the development of our internal sales, marketing and distribution capabilities would adversely impact the commercialization of any of our product candidates that we obtain approval to market. With respect to the commercialization of all or certain of our product candidates, we may choose to collaborate, either globally or on a territory-by-territory basis, with third parties that have direct sales forces and established distribution systems, either to augment our own sales force and distribution systems or in lieu of our own sales force and distribution systems. Further, we do not control the operations, priorities, or decision-making of third-party collaborators. As a result, we are dependent on others to execute commercial activities in accordance with our timelines and strategic objectives. If third-party collaborators experience delays, fail to meet their obligations, or prioritize other programs over our product candidates, our commercialization effects could be significantly delayed. We may have limited visibility into their commercialization timelines, resource allocation, and strategic decision-making, which could hinder our ability to accurately forecast product launches and revenue generation. If we are unable to enter into such arrangements when needed on acceptable terms, or at all, we may not be able to successfully commercialize any of our product candidates that receive regulatory approval, or any such commercialization may experience delays or limitations. If we are not successful in commercializing our product candidates, either on our own or through collaborations with one or more third parties, our future product revenue will suffer and we may incur significant additional losses.