Genenta Science S.p.A. [GNTA] Filings

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 20-F

(Mark One)

OR

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2023

OR

OR

Date of event requiring this shell company report__________

For the transition period from __________ to __________

Commission file number: 001-41115

Genenta Science S.p.A.

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

N/A

(Translation of Registrant’s name into English)

Italy

(Jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)

Via Olgettina No. 58

20132 Milan, Italy

(Address of principal executive offices)

Via Olgettina No. 58

20132 Milan, Italy

Attn: Pierluigi Paracchi

Tel: +39-02-2643-4681

Email: pierluigi.paracchi@genenta.com

(Name, Telephone, E-mail and/or Facsimile number and Address of Company Contact Person)

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None

(Title of Class)

Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act:

None

(Title of Class)

Indicate the number of outstanding shares of each of the Issuer’s classes of capital or common stock as of the close of the period covered by the annual report.

The registrant had 18,216,958 ordinary shares outstanding as of December 31, 2023.

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. ☐ Yes ☒ No

If this report is an annual or transition report, indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. ☐ Yes ☒ No

Note — Checking the box above will not relieve any registrant required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 from their obligations under those Sections.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. ☒ Yes ☐ No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files).

☒ Yes ☐ No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or an emerging growth company. See definition of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

If an emerging growth company that prepares its financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards† provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☐

If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant’s executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to §240.10D-1(b). ☐

Indicate by check mark which basis of accounting the registrant has used to prepare the financial statements included in this filing:

If “Other” has been checked in response to the previous question, indicate by check mark which financial statement item the registrant has elected to follow. ☐ Item 17 ☐ Item 18

If this is an annual report, indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). ☐ Yes ☒ No

(APPLICABLE ONLY TO ISSUERS INVOLVED IN BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS DURING THE PAST FIVE YEARS)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed all documents and reports required to be filed by Sections 12, 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 subsequent to the distribution of securities under a plan confirmed by a court. ☐ Yes ☐ No

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CERTAIN INFORMATION

As used in this Annual Report on Form 20-F (this “Annual Report”), unless otherwise indicated or the context otherwise requires, references to

Solely for the convenience of the reader, this Annual Report contains translations of certain EURO amounts into U.S. dollars at specified rates. Except as otherwise stated in this Annual Report, all translations from EURO to U.S. dollars are based on the noon buying rate of €1.00 per $1.10392 in the City of New York for cable transfers of EUROs, as certified for customs purposes by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York on December 29, 2023. No representation is made that such EURO amounts referred to in this Annual Report could have been or could be converted into U.S. dollars at such rates or any other rates. Any discrepancies in any table between totals and sums of the amounts listed are due to rounding.

The audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto as of and for fiscal 2023, 2022 and 2021 included elsewhere in this Annual Report have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“US GAAP”). Our fiscal semi-annual year end is June 30 and our fiscal year end is December 31.

In May 2021, we converted from a limited liability company (società a responsabilità limitata, or “S.r.l.”) to a joint stock company (società per azioni, or an “S.p.A.”) (the “Corporate Conversion”). This change in incorporation did not affect the financial information presented in this Annual Report, except for the transformation of our quotas into ordinary shares.

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report contains many statements that are “forward-looking” and uses forward-looking terminology such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “future,” “intend,” “may,” “ought to,” “plan,” “possible,” “potentially,” “predicts,” “project,” “should,” “will,” “would,” negatives of such terms or other similar statements. You should not place undue reliance on any forward-looking statement due to its inherent risk and uncertainties, both general and specific. Although we believe the assumptions on which the forward-looking statements are based are reasonable and within the bounds of our knowledge of our business and operations as of the date of this Annual Report, any or all of those assumptions could prove to be inaccurate. As a result, the forward-looking statements based on those assumptions could also be incorrect. The forward-looking statements in this Annual Report include, without limitation, statements relating to:

The forward-looking statements included in this Annual Report are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and assumptions about our businesses and business environments. These statements reflect our current views with respect to future events and are not a guarantee of future performance. Actual results of our operations may differ materially from information contained in the forward-looking statements as a result of risk factors, some of which are described under the headings “Risk Factors”, “Operating and Financial Review and Prospects,” “Information on our Company” and elsewhere in this Annual Report.

These risks and uncertainties are not exhaustive. Other sections of this Annual Report include additional factors which could adversely impact our business and financial performance. The forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report speak only as of the date of this Annual Report or, if obtained from third-party studies or reports, the date of the corresponding study or report, and are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements in this Annual Report. Since we operate in an emerging and evolving environment and new risk factors and uncertainties emerge from time to time, you should not rely upon forward-looking statements as predictions of future events. Except as otherwise required by the securities laws of the U.S., the E.U. and Italy, we undertake no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this Annual Report or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.

PART I

ITEM 1. IDENTITY OF DIRECTORS, SENIOR MANAGEMENT AND ADVISERS

A. Directors and Senior Management

Not required.

B. Advisers

Not required.

C. Auditors

Not required.

ITEM 2. OFFER STATISTICS AND EXPECTED TIMETABLE

A. Offer Statistics

Not applicable.

B. Method and Expect

Not applicable.

ITEM 3. KEY INFORMATION

A. [Reserved]

B. Capitalization and Indebtedness

Not required.

C. Reasons for the Offer and Use of Proceeds

Not required.

D. Risk Factors

You should carefully consider all of the information in this report, including various changing regulatory, competitive, economic, political and social risks and conditions described below, before making an investment in our ordinary shares. One or more of a combination of these risks could materially impact our business, results of operations and financial condition. In any such case, the market price of our ADSs or ordinary shares could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment.

Summary of Risk Factors

Risks relating to our business include issues arising from the following matters and related adverse developments:

Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Capital Requirements

We will need additional capital in the future. Raising additional capital by issuing securities may cause dilution to existing shareholders. Financing may not be available on acceptable terms, or at all. Failure to obtain this necessary capital when needed may force us to delay, limit or terminate our product candidate development efforts or other operations.

As of December 31, 2023, our cash and cash equivalents and marketable securities were approximately €18.8 million. If we continue to use cash at our historical rates of use, we will need significant additional financing, which we may seek through a combination of private and public equity offerings, debt financings and collaboration, in-licensing arrangements, joint ventures, strategic alliances or partnerships. For example, on May 12, 2023, we filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) a shelf registration statement, which was declared effective by the SEC on May 24, 2023 and permits us to sell from time to time additional ordinary shares, ordinary shares represented by ADSs or rights exercisable for ordinary shares or ADSs in one or more offerings in amounts, at prices and on the terms that we will determine at the time of offering for aggregate gross sales proceeds of up to $100.0 million. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, your ownership interest will be diluted, and the terms of any such offerings may include liquidation or other preferences that may adversely affect the then existing shareholders rights. Debt financing, if available, would result in increased fixed payment obligations, and we may be required to agree to certain restrictive covenants, such as limitations on our ability to incur additional debt, limitations on our ability to acquire, sell or license intellectual property rights and other operating restrictions that could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business. If we raise additional funds through collaborations, licensing arrangements, joint ventures, strategic alliances, or partnerships with third parties, we may be required to relinquish rights to some of our technologies or product candidates or otherwise agree to terms unfavorable to us. Even if we believe that we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans, we may seek additional capital if market conditions are favorable or if we have specific strategic considerations.

Our future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including but not limited to:

Any additional fundraising efforts may divert our management from their day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates. In addition, we cannot guarantee that future financing will be available in sufficient amounts or on terms acceptable to us, if at all. Moreover, the terms of any financing may adversely affect the holdings or the rights of holders of our securities and the issuance of additional securities, whether equity or debt, by us, or the possibility of such issuance, may cause the market price of our securities to decline.

If we are unable to obtain funding on a timely basis, we may be required to significantly curtail, delay or discontinue one or more of our research or development programs or the development or commercialization, if any, of any product candidates or be unable to expand our operations or otherwise capitalize on our business opportunities, as desired, which could materially affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Clinical drug development involves a lengthy and expensive process with uncertain timelines and uncertain outcomes, and results of earlier trials may not be predictive of future trial results. If clinical studies of our product candidates are prolonged or delayed, we may be unable to obtain the required regulatory approvals, and therefore be unable to commercialize our product candidates on a timely basis or at all.

We have a limited history of conducting large-scale or pivotal clinical studies, and no history commercializing pharmaceutical products, which may make it difficult to evaluate the prospects for our future viability. Our operations to date have been limited to financing and staffing our company, developing our technology, and developing Temferon for glioblastoma multiforme. We have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfully complete a large-scale or pivotal clinical study, obtain marketing approval, manufacture a commercial scale product, or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Consequently, predictions about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a history of successfully developing and commercializing pharmaceutical products.

If clinical studies for our product candidates are prolonged, delayed or stopped, we may be unable to obtain regulatory approval and commercialize our product candidates on a timely basis, which would require us to incur additional costs and delay or restrict our receipt of any product revenue. There have been significant developments in the highly dynamic field of immuno-oncology such as the earlier availability of product candidates or earlier approval of drugs for the same indications as our product candidates, which may lead us to adapt or alter our clinical programs. At this stage, we cannot assure you of the safety or tolerability of Temferon as a monotherapy, or of its ability to demonstrate efficacy in humans. The commencement of planned clinical studies could be substantially delayed or prevented by several factors, including:

The completion of our clinical studies could in the future be substantially delayed or prevented by several factors, including:

Changes in regulatory requirements and guidance may also occur and we may need to significantly amend clinical study protocols or submit new clinical study protocols to reflect these changes with the appropriate regulatory authorities. In addition, changes in the competitive environment have occurred and may continue to occur. Amendments may require us to renegotiate terms with CROs or resubmit clinical study protocols to IRBs or ethics committees for re-examination, which may impact the costs, timing or successful completion of a clinical study.

Our clinical studies may be suspended or terminated at any time by the AIFA, FDA, EMA, other regulatory authorities, the IRBs or ethics committees overseeing the clinical study at issue, any of our clinical study sites, or us, due to a number of factors, including:

Our research, development and clinical costs will increase if we experience delays in clinical studies or marketing approvals or if we are required to conduct additional clinical studies or other testing of our product candidates. We may be required to obtain additional funding to conduct and complete such clinical studies. We cannot assure you that our clinical studies will begin as planned or be completed on schedule, if at all, or that we will not need to restructure our trials after they have begun. Significant clinical study delays also could shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates or allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do, which may harm our business and results of operations. Any failure or significant delay in completing clinical studies for our product candidates would adversely affect our ability to obtain regulatory approval and our commercial prospects and ability to generate product revenue will be diminished.

We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company with limited operating history, which may make it difficult for you to evaluate the success of our business to date and to assess our future viability.

We are an emerging biotechnology company with a limited operating history. Investment in biopharmaceutical product development is highly speculative because it entails substantial upfront capital expenditures and significant risk that any potential product candidate will fail to demonstrate adequate effect or an acceptable safety profile, gain regulatory approval and become commercially viable. All of our product candidates are in early development, and none have been approved for commercial sale. We have not demonstrated an ability to successfully complete late-stage clinical trials, obtain regulatory approvals, manufacture our product candidates at commercial scale or arrange for a third-party to do so on our behalf, conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful commercialization, or obtain reimbursement in the countries of sale. We may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, and delays in achieving our business objectives. Our short history as an operating company makes any assessment of our future success or viability subject to significant uncertainty. If we do not address these risks successfully or are unable to transition at some point from a company with a research and development focus to a company capable of supporting commercial activities, then our business will be materially harmed.

We have incurred significant losses in every year since our inception. We expect to continue to incur losses over the next several years and may never achieve or maintain profitability.

We have no products approved for commercial sale, have not generated any revenue from commercial sales of our product candidates, and have incurred losses each year since our inception. Our losses for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021, were approximately €11.6 million, €8.5 million, and €5.5 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2023, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately €47.1 million. Substantially all of our operating losses resulted from costs incurred in connection with our research and development activities, including pre- and non-clinical development of our gene therapy product candidates, namely our leading product candidate Temferon, and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations.

We expect that it will be several years, if ever, before we have any product approved for commercial sale. We have funded our operations to date primarily through proceeds from our initial public offering of ADSs and ordinary shares in December 2021 (the “IPO”) and, prior to our IPO, the private placement of ordinary shares to our founding shareholders. We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and increasing operating losses for the foreseeable future. We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially if, and as, we:

We have not generated revenue from product sales and may never be profitable.

Our ability to generate revenue from product sales and achieve profitability depends on our ability, alone or with partners, to successfully complete the development of, and obtain the regulatory approvals necessary to commercialize, our product candidates. We do not anticipate generating revenues from product sales for the next several years, if ever, and our ability to do so depends heavily on our success in many areas, including but not limited to:

Even if one or more of the product candidates that we develop is approved for commercial sale, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercialization, with all associated risks and uncertainties. Therefore, we cannot predict when, or if, we will be able to achieve profitability. Additional clinical trials or delays in the initiation and completion of clinical trials could cause our expenses to increase significantly and profitability to be further delayed.

Our failure to become and remain profitable would decrease the value of our company and could impair our ability to raise capital, maintain our research and development efforts, expand our business or continue our operations. A decline in the value of our company also could cause you to lose all or part of your investment.

Risks Related to Product Development, Regulatory Approval and Commercialization

Our lentivirus ex-vivo gene transfer therapy product candidates are based on a novel technology, which makes it difficult to predict the time and cost of product candidate development and likelihood of subsequently obtaining regulatory approval.

We have concentrated our research and development efforts on our lentivirus ex-vivo gene transfer strategy approach, and our future success is highly dependent upon our successful development of commercially viable gene therapy product candidates. There can be no assurance that we will not experience problems or delays in developing new product candidates and that such problems or delays will not cause unanticipated costs, or that any such development problems can be solved. Because lentivirus ex-vivo gene transfer cell therapies represent a relatively new field of cellular immunotherapy and cancer treatment generally, developing and commercializing our product candidates subjects us to a number of risks and challenges, including:

We may not be able to successfully develop our lentivirus ex-vivo gene transfer product candidates or our technology in a manner that will yield products that are safe, effective, scalable, or profitable. Additionally, because our technology involves the genetic modification of patient cells ex vivo, we are subject to additional regulatory challenges and risks, including:

Moreover, public perception and awareness of cell and gene therapy safety issues may adversely influence the willingness of subjects to participate in clinical trials of our product candidates, or if approved, of physicians to prescribe our products. Physicians, hospitals and third-party payors often are slow to adopt new products, technologies and treatment practices that require additional upfront costs and training. Treatment centers may not be willing or able to devote the personnel and establish other infrastructure required for the administration of lentivirus ex-vivo gene transfer cell therapies. Physicians may not be willing to undergo training to adopt this novel and personalized therapy, may decide the therapy is too complex to adopt without appropriate training and may choose not to administer the therapy. Based on these and other factors, hospitals and payors may decide that the benefits of this new therapy do not or will not outweigh its costs.

Our gene therapy product candidates and the process for administering our product candidates may cause undesirable side effects or have other properties that could delay, prevent their regulatory approval, limit their commercial potential, or result in significant negative consequences following any potential marketing approval.

Following treatment with our gene therapy product candidates, patients may experience changes in their health, including illnesses, injuries, discomforts or a fatal outcome. It is possible that as we study and test Temferon or other product candidates in larger, longer and more extensive clinical programs, or as use of our product candidates becomes more widespread if they receive regulatory approval, illnesses, injuries, discomforts, side effects and other adverse events that were observed in earlier clinical trials, as well as conditions that did not occur or went undetected in previous clinical trials, will be reported by patients. Gene therapies are also subject to the potential risk that occurrence of adverse events will be delayed following administration of the gene therapy due to persistent biological activity of the genetic material or other components of the vectors used to carry the genetic material. Many times, additional safety risks, contraindications, drug interactions, adverse events and side effects are only detectable after investigational products are tested in larger scale clinical trials or, in some cases, after they are made available to patients on a commercial scale after approval. Moreover, as noted above, the FDA generally requires a long-term follow-up of study subjects for potential gene therapy-related adverse events for a 15-year period, including a minimum of five years of annual examinations followed by ten years of annual queries, either in person or by questionnaire, of study subjects. If additional clinical experience indicates that Temferon or any other product candidates or similar products developed by other companies has side effects or causes serious or life-threatening side effects, the development of the product candidate may fail or be delayed, or, if the product candidate has received regulatory approval, such approval may be revoked or limited.

There have been several significant adverse side effects in gene therapy treatments in the past, including reported cases of leukemia with the use of gammaretrovirus vector and patient deaths in other clinical trials. There have been recent case reports of suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions (“SUSARs”) involving an ex-vivo transduced lentivirus vector (“LVV”) gene therapy product, BlueBird Bio’s elivaldogene autotemcel (“Lenti-D”), involving two SUSARs for cases of acute myeloid leukemia (“AML”), and one case involving myelodysplastic syndrome.

In July 2021, the EMA safety committee (Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee – PRAC) announced that there is no evidence the LVV used in both Lenti-D and the E.U.-approved gene therapy Zynteglo spurred the AML cases.

BlueBird Bio announced on August 9, 2021 that the SUSAR involving myelodysplastic syndrome occurred in one patient treated with Lenti-D over a year previously, that this SUSAR “is likely mediated by Lenti-D lentiviral vector (LVV) insertion,” and that “[e]vidence currently available suggests that specific design features of Lenti-D LVV likely contributed to this event.” As a result of this SUSAR, the FDA has placed a clinical hold on BlueBird Bio’s Lenti-D phase 3 trial for cerebral adrenoleukodystrophy.

Gene therapy is still a relatively new approach to disease treatment and additional adverse side effects could develop. Possible adverse side effects that may occur with treatment with gene therapy products include an immunologic reaction early after administration that could substantially limit the effectiveness of the treatment or represent safety risks for patients. Another safety concern for gene therapies using viral vectors has been the possibility of insertional mutagenesis by the vectors, leading to malignant transformation of transduced cells. While our lentivirus ex-vivo gene transfer therapy approach is designed to avoid immunogenicity after administration, there can be no assurance that patients would not create antibodies that may impair treatment. Our approach involves the use of integrating vectors which have the potential for genomic disruption and therefore could interfere with other genes with adverse clinical effects. If any of our gene therapy product candidates demonstrates adverse side effects, we may decide or be required to halt or delay clinical development of such product candidates.

Potential risks for gene therapy products can be identified, in addition to side effects caused by the product candidate itself, as part of the entire process required for their manufacturing and administration. For Temferon manufacturing, each patient needs to be subjected to a mobilization and harvesting process for HSPC collection. This procedure is associated with risks linked to the administration of mobilization agents. The conditioning regimen required for administering our product candidate and the associated procedures can also cause adverse side effects. A gene therapy patient is generally administered with cytotoxic drugs to remove stem cells from the bone marrow to create sufficient space for the modified stem cells to engraft and produce their progeny. This procedure compromises the patient’s immune system, and adverse events related to preconditioning have been observed in our ongoing clinical trial. If in the future we are unable to demonstrate that such adverse events were caused by the conditioning regimens used, or by their administration process or related procedure, the FDA, EMA or other regulatory authorities could order us to cease further development of, or deny the approval of, Temferon or our other product candidates for any or all target indications. Even if we are able to demonstrate that adverse events are not related to our drug product, such occurrences could affect the ability to enroll patients to complete the clinical trial, or the commercial viability of any product candidates that obtain regulatory approval.

To date, Temferon has only been administered to a small number of human subjects in our ongoing Phase 1/2a study. Due to the lack of a broader experience in human subjects, there is limited information available about the relationship of adverse events to administration of Temferon. Adverse events experienced in our clinical trials and attributed to autologous stem cell transplant, concomitant medications, and disease progression have included febrile neutropenia and other infectious complications, venous thromboembolism, poor performance status, liver enzyme elevation, brain abscess and hemiparesis. While most of these adverse events were managed with treatment and supportive care, three glioblastoma multiforme (“GBM”) patients died within 122 days due to complications following the conditioning regimens and steroid use.

Patient deaths and severe adverse events caused by any investigational product candidates could result in the delay, suspension, clinical hold, or termination of clinical trials by sponsors, ethics committees and regulatory authorities. If we elect or are required to delay, suspend, or terminate any clinical trial of any product candidates that we develop, the commercial prospects of such product candidates will be harmed and our ability to generate product revenue from any of these product candidates would be delayed or eliminated. Serious adverse events observed in clinical trials could hinder or prevent market acceptance of the product candidate at issue. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, prospects, financial condition, and results of operations significantly.

Additionally, if any of our product candidates receives marketing approval, the FDA could require us to adopt a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (“REMS”) and EMA or other non-U.S. regulatory authorities could impose other specific obligations as a condition of approval to ensure that the benefits outweigh its risks, which may include, among other things, a medication guide outlining the risks of the product for distribution to patients, a communication plan to health care practitioners, and restrictions on how or where the product can be distributed, dispensed or used. Furthermore, if we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by Temferon or any of our other product candidates, several potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of our product candidates and could significantly harm our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

We are evaluating Temferon in a Phase 1/2a clinical trial in newly diagnosed unmethylated MGMT gene promoter glioblastoma tumor patients (the “TEM-GBM Study”). To date, the TEM-GBM Study is ongoing and not complete.

We are at a very early stage of development for all our gene therapy product candidates. At this stage, only our lead product candidate Temferon has been authorized by AIFA to be evaluated in a Phase 1/2a clinical trial in Italy. A study testing Temferon in multiple myeloma study was also approved by AIFA, but we closed the study due to lack of enrollment feasibility, rather than clinical events, as no multiple myeloma patients have been treated with Temferon.

In order to commence a clinical trial in the U.S., we will be required to seek FDA acceptance of an investigational new drug application (“IND”) for each of our product candidates, including Temferon. We cannot be sure any IND we submit to the FDA, or any similar clinical trial application we submit in other countries, will be accepted. If we will be required by regulatory authorities to conduct additional preclinical testing prior to filing an IND or similar application to clinically evaluate any of our product candidates, including Temferon, this may result in delay in our product candidate development. The results of any such preclinical testing may not be positive and may not support an application to study Temferon or any of our other product candidates in additional clinical trials. Currently, we do not have plans to conduct a clinical trial outside of Italy.

It is possible that the FDA or EMA will not view our ongoing or planned trials as providing adequate support for future clinical trials or for an application for marketing approval, for any one or more reasons, including elements of the design or execution of the trials or safety concerns or other trial results. If we are unable to confirm or replicate the results of our trials in larger patient group or if negative results are obtained, we would likely be further delayed or prevented from advancing further clinical development of Temferon or any of our other product candidates.

Additionally, the FDA or EMA may disagree with the sufficiency of our proposed reliance upon the preclinical, manufacturing, or clinical data generated by third-party academic-sponsored trials, or our interpretation of preclinical, manufacturing, or clinical data from our ongoing trials with AIFA. If so, the FDA or EMA may require us to obtain and submit additional preclinical, manufacturing, or clinical data.

We need to complete our Phase 1/2a clinical trial for Temferon, as well as additional clinical trials to obtain regulatory approvals to market Temferon. Carrying out later-stage clinical trials is a complicated process. We are a small organization with limited experience in preparing, submitting, and prosecuting regulatory filings, and we have not previously submitted a BLA to the FDA or the equivalent application to EMA for any product candidate.

In addition, we have not yet conducted clinical trials of any our product candidates in the U.S. or Europe (outside of Italy), and we cannot be certain how many clinical trials of Temferon or any of our other product candidates will be required or how such trials should be designed. Consequently, we may be unable to successfully and efficiently execute and complete necessary clinical trials in a way that leads to a BLA submission (or its equivalent for EMA) and approval of Temferon or any of our other product candidates. We may require more time and incur greater costs than our competitors and may not succeed in obtaining regulatory approvals of product candidates that we develop. Failure to commence or complete, or delays in, our planned clinical trials, could prevent us from or delay us in commercializing Temferon.

We may encounter substantial delays in commencement and completion of clinical trials.

Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of our product candidates, we must conduct extensive clinical studies to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the product candidates in humans. Clinical development is a long, expensive, and uncertain process, and delay or failure can occur at any stage of any of our clinical trials. We cannot guarantee that any clinical studies will be conducted or completed on schedule, if at all. Clinical trials can be delayed or prevented for several reasons, including:

Clinical trials may also be delayed or terminated because of ambiguous or negative interim results. In addition, a clinical trial may be suspended or terminated by us, AIFA, the FDA, EMA, the IRBs at the sites where the IRBs are overseeing a trial, a data safety monitoring board overseeing the clinical trial at issue or by other regulatory authorities due to a number of factors, including:

Any inability to successfully complete preclinical and clinical development could result in additional costs to us or impair our ability to generate revenues. This could result in increased costs, delays in advancing our product candidates, delays in testing the effectiveness of our product candidates or termination of the clinical trials altogether.

In addition, if we make changes to our product candidates, we may need to conduct additional studies to bridge our modified product candidates to earlier versions, this will increase the costs and could delay our clinical development plan, or marketing approval for our product candidates. For example, among our preclinical candidates, we are developing a “switchable” system. This system has the potential to be a “switchable” on/off system that may limit the long-term exposure to any selected therapeutic payloads, but it requires further preclinical testing as well as additional manufacturing validation. Moreover, our platform is designed to allow us to use other therapeutic payloads, other than IFN-α. This has the potential to open a multitude of therapeutic indications but further preclinical testing as well as additional manufacturing validation are required. Any modification of our product candidates will likely require updates to our clinical trial applications and INDs with the relevant regulatory authorities, which may result in delay, suspension, or termination of ongoing or future clinical trials pending our submission, and the agencies’ review, of such updates. Clinical study delays could also shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates or allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do, which could impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and may harm our business and results of operations.

The results of preclinical studies, early-stage clinical trials, data obtained from real-world use, and published third-party studies may not be indicative of results in future clinical trials and we cannot assure you that any clinical trials will lead to results sufficient for the necessary regulatory approvals.

The results of preclinical studies may not be predictive of the results of clinical trials, and the results of any completed clinical trials, including studies derived from real-world use and studies in published literature, or clinical trials we commence may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. Additionally, interim results and analyses from our ongoing clinical trials do not necessarily predict final results. Moreover, preliminary data and analyses from our ongoing clinical trials may change as more patient data becomes available. In general, we conduct interim analyses at pre-specified times, which do not include data after the cut-off date and will not be available until the next planned interim analysis. From time to time, preliminary data and analyses might be presented, typically by academic investigators at scientific conferences or in scientific publications. Interim data and analyses are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and/or more patient data becomes available to us. Interim and preliminary data/analyses also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data available to us or that we previously published. As a result, preliminary and interim data/analyses should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. Material adverse changes in the final data compared to the preliminary or interim data/analyses could significantly harm our business prospects.

Indeed, our product candidates may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy in clinical development despite demonstrating positive results in preclinical studies or having successfully advanced through initial clinical trials. Later clinical trial results may not replicate earlier clinical trials for a variety of reasons, including differences in trial design, different trial endpoints (or lack of trial endpoints in exploratory studies), subject population, number of subjects, subject selection criteria, trial duration, drug dosage and formulation and lack of statistical power in the earlier studies. Our company has limited experience in designing and conducting clinical trials and we may be unable to design and execute a clinical trial to support regulatory approval. There can be no assurance that any of our clinical trials will ultimately be successful or support further clinical development of any of our product candidates. Several companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in clinical development even after achieving promising results in earlier studies, and any such setbacks in our clinical development could have a negative impact on our business. Any of our product candidates, including Temferon, may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy in clinical development despite positive results in preclinical studies. Any such failure would cause us to abandon the product candidate.

Additionally, our ongoing clinical trial utilizes, and our planned clinical trials may utilize, an “open-label” trial design. An “open-label” clinical trial is one where both the patient and investigator know whether the patient is receiving the investigational product candidate or either an existing approved drug or placebo. Most typically, open-label clinical trials test only the investigational product candidate and sometimes may do so at different dose levels. Open-label clinical trials are subject to various limitations that may exaggerate any therapeutic effect as patients in open-label clinical trials are aware when they are receiving treatment. Open-label clinical trials may be subject to a “patient bias” where patients perceive their symptoms to have improved merely due to their awareness of receiving an experimental treatment. In addition, open-label clinical trials may be subject to an “investigator bias” where those assessing and reviewing the physiological outcomes of the clinical trials are aware of which patients have received treatment and may interpret the information of the treated group more favorably given this knowledge. The results from an open-label trial may not be predictive of future clinical trial results with any of our product candidates for which we include an open-label clinical trial when studied in a controlled environment with a placebo or active control.

We may find it difficult to enroll patients in our clinical trials, which could delay or prevent us from proceeding with clinical trials of our product candidates.

Identifying and qualifying patients to participate in clinical trials of our product candidates is critical to our success. The timing of our clinical trials depends on our ability and on the speed at which we can recruit patients to participate in testing our product candidates, as well as the completion of required follow-up periods. We may experience delays in our clinical trials if we encounter difficulties in enrollment. Patients may be unwilling to participate in our gene therapy clinical trials because of negative publicity from adverse events related to the biotechnology or gene therapy fields, the safety profile of our product candidate under study, the perceived risks and benefits of the product candidate under study; the perceived risks and benefits of gene therapy-based approaches to treatment of diseases, including any required pretreatment conditioning regimens, the existence of competitive clinical trials for similar patient populations.

In addition, we may not be able to identify, recruit and enroll a sufficient number of patients due to the existence of efficacious alternative treatments, the size of the patient population and process for identifying subjects, the design of the trial protocol, the exclusion/inclusion criteria that we are currently targeting may limit the pool of patients that may be enrolled in our ongoing or planned clinical trials, the proximity and availability of clinical trial sites for prospective subjects and the patient referral practices of physicians, and the ability to obtain and maintain subject consent, as well as the risk that enrolled subjects will drop out before completion of the trial.

If patients are unwilling to participate in our studies for any reason, the timeline for recruiting patients, conducting studies, and obtaining regulatory approval of potential product candidates will be delayed.

If we experience delays in the commencement or completion or termination of any clinical trial of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of our product candidates will be harmed, and our ability to generate product candidate revenue from any of these product candidates could be delayed or prevented. In addition, any delays in completing our clinical trials will increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and approval process and jeopardize our ability to commence product candidate sales and generate revenue. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition, and prospects significantly. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates.

The results of clinical trials conducted at clinical sites outside the U.S. may not be accepted by the FDA and the results of clinical trials conducted at clinical sites in the U.S. may not be accepted by international regulatory authorities.

To date our only ongoing recruiting clinical trial has been conducted in Italy but we are eventually planning to globally develop Temferon, including in the U.S. Although the FDA may accept data from clinical trials conducted outside the U.S., acceptance of this data is subject to certain conditions imposed by the FDA. For example, the clinical trial must be well-designed and conducted and performed by qualified investigators in accordance with GCPs, ethical principles such as or IRB or ethics committee approval and informed consent. Generally, the subject population for any clinical trials conducted outside of the U.S. must be representative of the U.S. population, and the data must be applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice in ways that the FDA deems clinically meaningful. In addition, while these clinical trials are subject to the applicable local laws, FDA acceptance of the data will be dependent upon its determination that the trials were conducted consistent with all applicable U.S. laws and regulations. There can be no assurance the FDA or international regulatory authorities will accept data from trials conducted in Italy or outside of the location in which each regulatory authority is based as adequate support of a marketing application in each jurisdiction. If the FDA does not accept the data from sites in our Italian conducted clinical trials, or if international regulatory authorities do not accept the data from our future U.S. clinical trials, it would likely result in the need for additional trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and could delay or permanently halt the development of one or more of our product candidates.

Our ability to successfully initiate, enroll and complete a clinical trial in any foreign country including the U.S., is subject to numerous risks unique to conducting business in foreign countries, including:

Changes in methods of product candidate manufacturing or formulation may result in additional costs or delay.

As product candidates proceed through preclinical studies to late-stage clinical trials towards potential approval and commercialization, it is common that various aspects of the development program, such as manufacturing methods and formulation, are altered along the way to optimize processes and results. Such changes carry the risk that they will not achieve these intended objectives. We may also experience delays in developing a sustainable, reproducible, and scalable manufacturing process or delays in transferring that process to commercial partners, which may prevent us from initiating, completing, or expanding our clinical trials or commercializing our products, if any, on a timely or profitable basis, if at all. For example, the anticipated transition of our cell processing to a different commercial partner in the U.S., or to a commercial partner(s) relying on automated closed system, if available, using all disposable supplies would require regulatory approvals, may not be successful or may experience unforeseen delays, which may cause shortages or delays in the supply of our products available for clinical trials and future commercial sales, if any. In addition, there is no assurance that products manufactured using a different commercial partner or an automated closed system, if and when available, will achieve the same results observed to date in Temferon clinical and preclinical and non-clinical studies. Any of these changes could cause our product candidates to perform differently and affect the results of planned clinical trials or other future clinical trials conducted with the materials manufactured using altered processes. Such changes may also require additional testing such as comparability studies, FDA or EMA notification or FDA approval. This could delay completion of clinical trials, require the conduct of bridging clinical trials or the repetition of one or more clinical trials, increase clinical trial costs, delay approval of our product candidates and jeopardize our ability to commence sales and generate revenue.

Even if we complete the necessary preclinical and clinical studies, we cannot predict when or if we will obtain regulatory approval to commercialize a product candidate and the approval may be for a narrower indication than we seek.

We cannot commercialize a product until the appropriate regulatory authorities have reviewed and approved the product candidate. Even if our product candidates demonstrate safety and efficacy in preclinical and clinical studies, the regulatory agencies may not complete their review processes in a timely manner, or we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval. Many companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in late-stage clinical trials even after achieving promising results in preclinical testing and earlier-stage clinical trials. Additional delays may result if an FDA Advisory Committee or other regulatory authority does not recommend approval or recommends restrictions on approval. In addition, we may experience delays or rejections based upon additional government regulation from future legislation or administrative action, or changes in regulatory agency policy during the period of product development, clinical studies, and the review process. Regulatory agencies also may approve a product candidate for fewer or more limited indications than requested or may grant approval subject to the performance of post-marketing studies. In addition, regulatory agencies may not approve the labeling claims that are necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of our product candidates. If we are unable to obtain necessary regulatory approvals, our business, prospects, financial condition, and results of operations may suffer.

We may seek designations for our product candidates with the FDA, EMA and other comparable regulatory authorities that are intended to confer benefits such as a faster development process or an accelerated regulatory pathway, but there can be no assurance that we will successfully obtain such designations. In addition, even if one or more of our product candidates are granted such designations, we may not be able to realize the intended benefits of such designations.

The FDA, EMA, and other comparable regulatory authorities, offer certain designations for product candidates that are intended to encourage the research and development of pharmaceutical and biotechnology products addressing conditions with significant unmet medical need. These designations may confer benefits such as additional interaction with regulatory authorities, a potentially accelerated regulatory pathway and priority review. There can be no assurance that we will successfully obtain such a designation for Temferon. In addition, while such designations could expedite the development or approval process, they do not change the standards for approval. Even if we obtain such designations for one or more of our product candidates, there can be no assurance that we will realize their intended benefits.

For example, we may seek a Breakthrough Therapy Designation from the FDA for one or more of our product candidates. A Breakthrough Therapy Designation is defined as a therapy that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other therapies, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, if preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the therapy may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. For therapies that have Breakthrough Therapy Designation, interaction and communication between the FDA and the sponsor of the trial can help to identify the most efficient path for clinical development while minimizing the number of patients placed in ineffective control regimens. Therapies with Breakthrough Therapy Designation from the FDA are also eligible for accelerated approval. Designation as a breakthrough therapy is within the discretion of the FDA. Accordingly, even if we believe one of our product candidates meets the criteria for Breakthrough Therapy Designation, the FDA may disagree and instead determine not to make such designation. In any event, the receipt of a Breakthrough Therapy Designation for a product candidate may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to therapies considered for approval under conventional FDA procedures and does not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, even if one or more of our product candidates qualify for Breakthrough Therapy Designation, the FDA may later decide that such product candidates no longer meet the conditions for qualification.

We may also seek Fast Track Designation from the FDA for some of our product candidates. If a therapy is intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening condition and the therapy demonstrates the potential to address unmet medical needs for this condition, the therapy sponsor may apply for Fast Track Designation. The FDA has broad discretion whether or not to grant this designation, so even if we believe a particular product candidate is eligible for this designation, there can be no assurance that the FDA would decide to grant it. Even if we do receive Fast Track Designation, we may not experience a faster development process, review or approval compared to conventional FDA procedures and receiving a Fast Track Designation does not provide assurance of FDA ultimate approval. The FDA may withdraw Fast Track Designation if it believes that the designation is no longer supported by data from our clinical development program.

In addition, we may seek a regenerative medicine advanced therapy (“RMAT”) designation for some of our product candidates. An RMAT is defined as a cell therapy, therapeutic tissue engineering products, human cell and tissue products, or any combination products using any such therapies or products. Gene therapies, including genetically modified cells that lead to a durable modification of cells or tissues may meet the definition of regenerative medicine therapy. The RMAT program is intended to facilitate efficient development and expedite review of RMATs, which are intended to treat, modify, reverse, or cure a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and for which preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the candidate has potential to address unmet medical needs for such disease or condition. A new drug application or a BLA for an RMAT may be eligible for priority review or accelerated approval through (1) surrogate or intermediate endpoints reasonably likely to predict long-term clinical benefit or (2) reliance upon data obtained from a meaningful number of sites. Benefits of such designation also include early interactions with FDA to discuss any potential surrogate or intermediate endpoint to be used to support accelerated approval. A regenerative medicine therapy that is granted accelerated approval and is subject to post-approval requirements may fulfill such requirements through the submission of clinical evidence, clinical studies, patient registries, or other sources of real-world evidence, such as electronic health records; the collection of larger confirmatory data sets; or post-approval monitoring of all patients treated with such therapy prior to its approval. RMAT designation is within the discretion of the FDA. Accordingly, even if we believe one of our product candidates meets the criteria for designation as a regenerative medicine advanced therapy, the FDA may disagree and instead determine not to make such designation. In any event, the receipt of RMAT designation for a product candidate may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to product candidates considered for approval under conventional FDA procedures and does not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, even if one or more of our product candidates qualify for RMAT designation, the FDA may later decide that the biological products no longer meet the conditions for qualification.

We may seek a conditional marketing authorization in Europe for some or all of our current product candidates, but we may not be able to obtain or maintain such a designation.

As part of its marketing authorization process, EMA may grant marketing authorizations for certain categories of medicinal products based on less complete data than is normally required, where the benefit of immediate availability of the medicine outweighs the risk inherent in the fact that additional data are still required or in the interests of public health. In such cases, it is possible for the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (“CHMP”) to recommend the granting of a marketing authorization, subject to certain specific obligations to be reviewed annually, which is referred to as a conditional marketing authorization. This may apply to medicinal products for human use that fall under the jurisdiction of the EMA, including those that aim at the treatment, the prevention, or the medical diagnosis of seriously debilitating or life-threatening diseases and those designated as orphan medicinal products.

A conditional marketing authorization may be granted when the CHMP finds that, although comprehensive clinical data referring to the safety and efficacy of the medicinal product have not been supplied, all the following requirements are met:

The granting of a conditional marketing authorization is restricted to situations in which only the clinical part of the application is not yet fully complete. Incomplete preclinical or quality data may only be accepted if duly justified and only in the case of a product intended to be used in emergency situations in response to public health threats. Conditional marketing authorizations are valid for one year, on a renewable basis. The holder will be required to complete ongoing trials or to conduct new trials with a view to confirming that the benefit-risk balance is positive. In addition, specific obligations may be imposed in relation to the collection of pharmacovigilance data.

Granting a conditional marketing authorization allows medicines to reach patients with unmet medical needs earlier than might otherwise be the case and will ensure that additional data on a product is generated, submitted, assessed, and acted upon. Although we may seek a conditional marketing authorization for one or more of our product candidates by the EMA, the CHMP may ultimately not agree that the requirements for such conditional marketing authorization have been satisfied and hence delay the commercialization of our product candidates.

We have received orphan drug designation for Temferon for the treatment of GBM and we may seek orphan drug designation for additional indications and for other product candidates. We may be unable to obtain orphan drug designation for our product candidates and, even if we obtain such designation, we may not be able to realize the benefits of such designation, including potential marketing exclusivity of our product candidates, if approved.

Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the U.S. and E.U., may designate drugs for relatively small patient populations as “orphan drugs.” Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a product as an orphan drug if it is a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the U.S. or a patient population of 200,000 or more individuals in the U.S., but for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in the U.S. In the E.U., the European Commission grants orphan drug designation to promote the development of products that are intended for the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition affecting not more than five in 10,000 persons in the E.U. community. Additionally, designation is granted for products intended for the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of a life-threatening, seriously debilitating, or serious and chronic condition and when, without incentives, it is unlikely that sales of the drug in the E.U. would be sufficient to justify the necessary investment in developing the drug or biologic product. In either case, the applicant for orphan designation must also demonstrate that no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention, or treatment for the condition has been authorized (or, if a method exists, the new product would be a significant benefit to those affected compared to the product available).

Temferon has been granted orphan drug designation in the U.S. and E.U. for the treatment of GBM. If we request orphan drug designation from the FDA for Temferon for additional indications, if we request the international equivalent from the applicable regulatory authorities for Temferon or if we request orphan drug designation or the international equivalent for any of our other product candidates, there can be no assurances that the FDA or international regulatory authorities will grant any of our product candidates such designation. This designation of a product candidate as an orphan product does not mean that any regulatory agency will accelerate regulatory review of, or ultimately approve, that product candidate, nor does it limit the ability of any regulatory agency to grant orphan drug designation to product candidates of other companies that treat the same indications as our product candidates prior to our product candidates receiving exclusive marketing approval.

Generally, if a product candidate with an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first marketing approval for the indication for which it has such designation, the drug may be entitled to a period of marketing exclusivity, which precludes the FDA or EMA from approving another marketing application for the same drug for the same indication for that time period, except in limited circumstances. If another sponsor receives such approval before we do (regardless of our orphan drug designation), we will be precluded from receiving marketing approval for our product for the applicable exclusivity period. The applicable period is seven years in the U.S. and ten years in the E.U. The exclusivity period in the E.U. can be reduced to six years if a drug no longer meets the criteria for orphan drug designation or if the drug is sufficiently profitable so that market exclusivity is no longer justified. Orphan drug exclusivity may be revoked if any regulatory agency determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantity of the drug to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition.

Even if we obtain orphan drug exclusivity for a product candidate, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product candidate from competition because different drugs can be approved for the same indication. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA may subsequently approve another drug for the same condition if the FDA concludes that the latter drug is not the same drug or is clinically superior in that it is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care. In the E.U., marketing authorization may be granted to a similar medicinal product for the same orphan indication if:

Even if we obtain and maintain regulatory approval for a product candidate, our products will remain subject to ongoing regulatory oversight.

Even if we obtain any regulatory approval for our product candidates, they will be subject to ongoing regulatory requirements for manufacturing, labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion, sampling, record-keeping and submission of safety and other post-market information. Any regulatory approvals that we receive for our product candidates also may be subject to a REMS, limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the 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 quality, safety, and efficacy of the product. For example, as noted above in the U.S., the holder of an approved BLA is obligated to monitor and report adverse events and any failure of a product to meet the specifications in the BLA. FDA guidance advises that patients treated with some types of gene therapy undergo follow-up observations for potential adverse events for as long as 15 years. The holder of an approved marketing application also must submit new or supplemental applications and obtain FDA approval for certain changes to the approved product, product labeling or manufacturing process.

We must comply with requirements concerning advertising and promotion for any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. Promotional communications with respect to therapeutics are subject to a variety of legal and regulatory restrictions and continuing review by the FDA, EMA, or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, Department of Justice, Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of Inspector General, state attorneys general, members of Congress, and the public. When the FDA, EMA, or comparable foreign regulatory authorities issue regulatory approval for a product candidate, the regulatory approval is limited to those specific uses and indications for which a product is approved. If we are not able to obtain FDA, EMA, or comparable foreign regulatory authority approval for desired uses or indications for our current product candidates and any future product candidates, we may not market or promote them for those indications and uses, referred to as off-label uses, and our business, financial condition, results of operations, stock price and prospects will be materially harmed. We also must sufficiently substantiate any claims that we make for our products, including claims comparing our products to other companies’ products, and must abide by the FDA, EMA, or a comparable foreign regulatory authority’s strict requirements regarding the content of promotion and advertising.

While physicians may choose to prescribe products for uses that are not described in the product’s labeling and for uses that differ from those tested in clinical trials and approved by the regulatory authorities, we and any third parties engaged on our behalf are prohibited from marketing and promoting the products for indications and uses that are not specifically approved by the FDA, EMA, or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Regulatory authorities in the U.S. generally do not restrict or regulate the behavior of physicians in their choice of treatment within the practice of medicine. Regulatory authorities do, however, restrict communications by biopharmaceutical companies concerning off-label use.

If we are found to have impermissibly promoted any of our current product candidates and any future product candidates, we may become subject to significant liability and government fines. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations regarding product promotion, particularly those prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses, and a company that is found to have improperly promoted a product may be subject to significant sanctions. The U.S. federal government has levied large civil and criminal fines against companies for alleged improper promotion and has enjoined several companies from engaging in off-label promotion. The FDA has also requested that companies enter consent decrees or permanent injunctions under which specified promotional conduct is changed or curtailed.

In the E.U., the advertising and promotion of our products are subject to E.U. laws governing promotion of medicinal products, interactions with physicians, misleading and comparative advertising, and unfair commercial practices. In addition, other legislation adopted by individual E.U. Member States may apply to the advertising and promotion of medicinal products. These laws require that promotional materials and advertising for medicinal products are consistent with the product’s Summary of Product Characteristics (“SmPC”) as approved by the competent authorities. The SmPC is a document that provides information to physicians concerning the safe and effective use of the medicinal product. It forms an intrinsic and integral part of the marketing authorization granted for the medicinal product. Promotion of a medicinal product that does not comply with the SmPC is considered to constitute off-label promotion. The off-label promotion of medicinal products is prohibited in the E.U. The applicable laws at the E.U. level and in the individual E.U. Member States also prohibit the direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription-only medicinal products. Violations of the rules governing the promotion of medicinal products in the E.U. could be penalized by administrative measures, fines, and imprisonment. These laws may further limit or restrict the advertising and promotion of our products to the general public and may also impose limitations on our promotional activities with health care professionals.

In addition, product manufacturers and their facilities are subject to payment of user fees and continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA, EMA, and other regulatory authorities for compliance with current good manufacturing practices (“GMP”) requirements and adherence to commitments made in the BLA or foreign marketing application. If we, or a regulatory authority, discover previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where the product is manufactured or disagrees with the promotion, marketing or labeling of that product, a regulatory authority may impose restrictions relative to that product, the manufacturing facility or us, including requiring recall or withdrawal of the product from the market or suspension of manufacturing.

If we fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, a regulatory authority may:

Any government investigation of alleged violations of law could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity. The occurrence of any event or penalty described above may inhibit our ability to commercialize our product candidates and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

In addition, the FDA’s policies, and those of the EMA and other regulatory authorities, may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit, or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the U.S. 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, which would materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Both marketing authorization holders and manufacturers of medicinal products are subject to comprehensive regulatory oversight by the EMA and the competent authorities of the individual E.U. Member States both before and after grant of the manufacturing and marketing authorizations. This includes control of compliance with GMP rules, which govern quality control of the manufacturing process and require documentation policies and procedures. We and our third-party manufacturers would be required to ensure that all our processes, quality systems, methods, and equipment are compliant with GMP. Failure by us or by any of our third-party partners, including suppliers, manufacturers, and distributors to comply with E.U. laws and the related national laws of individual E.U. Member States governing the conduct of clinical trials, manufacturing approval, marketing authorization of medicinal products, both before and after grant of marketing authorization, and marketing of such products following grant of authorization may result in administrative, civil, or criminal penalties. These penalties could include delays in or refusal to authorize the conduct of clinical trials or to grant marketing authorization, product withdrawals and recalls, product seizures, suspension, or variation of the marketing authorization, total or partial suspension of production, distribution, manufacturing, or clinical trials, operating restrictions, injunctions, suspension of licenses, fines, and criminal penalties. operating restrictions, injunctions, suspension of licenses, fines, and criminal penalties.

In addition, E.U. legislation related to pharmacovigilance, or the assessment and monitoring of the safety of medicinal products, provides that EMA and the competent authorities of the E.U. Member States have the authority to require companies to conduct additional post-approval clinical efficacy and safety studies. The legislation also governs the obligations of marketing authorization holders with respect to additional monitoring, adverse event management and reporting. Under the pharmacovigilance legislation and its related regulations and guidelines, we may be required to conduct a burdensome collection of data regarding the risks and benefits of marketed products and may be required to engage in ongoing assessments of those risks and benefits, including the possible requirement to conduct additional clinical trials, which may be time-consuming and expensive and could impact our profitability. Non-compliance with such obligations can lead to the variation, suspension or withdrawal of marketing authorization or imposition of financial penalties or other enforcement measures.

We do not have sales, distribution, and marketing capabilities. If we are unable to develop these capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell Temferon and our other product candidates, we will be unable to generate any product revenue.

We currently have no sales, distribution, or marketing organization. To successfully commercialize any of our current or future product candidates, if approved, we will need to develop these capabilities, either on our own or with others. The establishment and development of our own commercial team or the establishment of a contract sales force to market any product candidate we may develop will be expensive and time-consuming and could delay any product launch. Moreover, we cannot be certain that we will be able to successfully develop this capability. We may enter collaborations or alternative transactions and arrangements regarding any approved product candidates with other entities to utilize their established marketing and distribution capabilities, but we may be unable to enter into such agreements on favorable terms, if at all. If any future collaborators do not commit sufficient resources to commercialize our product candidates, or we are unable to develop the necessary capabilities on our own, we will be unable to generate sufficient product revenue to sustain our business. We compete with many companies that currently have extensive, experienced, and well-funded sales, distribution, and marketing operations to recruit, hire, train and retain marketing and sales personnel. We also face competition in our search for third parties to assist us with the sales and marketing efforts of our product candidates, if approved. Without an internal team or the support of a third party to perform marketing and sales functions, we may be unable to compete successfully against these more established companies.

Even if any of our product candidates receives marketing approval, it may fail to achieve the degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, third party payors and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success.

The commercial success of Temferon will depend upon the acceptance of each product by the medical community, including physicians, patients, and third party payors. The degree of market acceptance of any approved product will depend on a number of factors, including:

If Temferon is approved but does not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, third party payors and patients, we may not generate sufficient revenue from the product, and we may not become or remain profitable. In addition, our efforts to educate the medical community and third-party payors on the benefits of the product may require significant resources and may never be successful.

In addition, we may choose to collaborate 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. If we enter collaborations or alternative transactions or arrangements with third parties to perform sales, marketing and distribution services for our products, the resulting revenues, or the profitability from these revenues to us are likely to be lower than if we had sold, marketed, and distributed our products ourselves. If we are unable to enter such arrangements on acceptable terms or at all, we may not be able to successfully commercialize any of our product candidates that receive regulatory approval. Depending on the nature of the third party relationship, we may have little control over such third parties, and any of these third parties may fail to devote the necessary resources and attention to sell, market and distribute our products effectively. 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.

Even if we can commercialize any product candidates, the products may become subject to unfavorable pricing regulations or third-party coverage and reimbursement policies, any of which could harm our business.

Our ability to commercialize any product candidates successfully will depend, in part, on the extent to which coverage and reimbursement for these products and related treatments will be available from government health administration authorities, private health insurers and other organizations. Government authorities and third-party payors, such as private health insurers and health maintenance organizations, decide which medications they will pay for and impact reimbursement levels.

Obtaining and maintaining adequate reimbursement for our products may be difficult. We cannot be certain if we will obtain an adequate level of reimbursement for our products by third party payors. Even if we do obtain adequate levels of reimbursement, third-party payors, such as government or private healthcare insurers, carefully review and increasingly question the coverage of, and challenge the prices charged for, drugs. Reimbursement rates from private health insurance companies vary depending on the company, the insurance plan, and other factors. A primary trend in the U.S. healthcare industry, and elsewhere around the world, is cost containment. Government authorities and third party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for medications. Increasingly, third party payors are requiring that drug companies provide them with predetermined discounts from list prices and are challenging the prices charged for drugs. We may also be required to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies to justify coverage and reimbursement or the level of reimbursement relative to other therapies. If coverage and reimbursement are not available or reimbursement is available only to limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval, and the royalties resulting from the sales of those products may also be adversely impacted.

There may be significant delays in obtaining reimbursement for newly approved drugs, and coverage may be more limited than the purposes for which the drug is approved by the FDA, EMA, or other regulatory authorities outside the U.S. Moreover, eligibility for reimbursement does not imply that a drug will be paid for in all cases or at a rate that covers our costs, including research, development, manufacture, sale, and distribution. Interim reimbursement levels for new drugs, if applicable, may also not be sufficient to cover our costs and may not be made permanent. Reimbursement rates may vary according to the use of the drug and the clinical setting in which it is used, may be based on reimbursement levels already set for lower cost drugs and may be incorporated into existing payments for other services. Net prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payors and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the U.S. Our inability to promptly obtain coverage and adequate reimbursement rates from both government-funded and private payors for any approved products that we develop could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, our ability to raise capital needed to commercialize products and our overall financial condition.

The regulations that govern marketing approvals, pricing, coverage, and reimbursement for new drug products vary widely from country to country. Current and future legislation may significantly change the approval requirements in ways that could involve additional costs and cause delays in obtaining approvals. Some countries require approval of the sale price of a drug before it can be reimbursed. In many countries, the pricing review period begins after marketing or product licensing approval is granted. In some foreign markets, prescription drug pricing remains subject to continuing governmental control, including possible price reductions, even after initial approval is granted. As a result, we might obtain marketing approval for a product in a particular country, but then be subject to price regulations that delay our commercial launch of the product, possibly for lengthy time periods, and negatively impact the revenues we are able to generate from the sale of the product in that country. Adverse pricing limitations may hinder our ability to recoup our investment in one or more product candidates, even if our product candidates obtain marketing approval. There can be no assurance that our product candidates, if they are approved for sale in the U.S. or in other countries, will be considered medically necessary or cost-effective for a specific indication, or that coverage or an adequate level of reimbursement will be available.

Obtaining and maintaining regulatory approval of our product candidates in one jurisdiction does not mean that we will be successful in obtaining regulatory approval of our product candidates in other jurisdictions. Our failure to obtain regulatory approval in international jurisdictions would prevent our product candidates from being marketed around the world, and any approval we are granted for our product candidates in Italy would not assure approval of product candidates in other jurisdictions, including the U.S.

To market any products outside of Italy, we must establish and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries, including but not limited to the U.S., regarding clinical trial design, safety, and efficacy. The research, testing, manufacturing, labeling, approval, sale, marketing, and distribution of drugs are subject to extensive regulation by regulatory authorities. These regulations differ from country to country. Even if we obtain and maintain regulatory approval of our product candidates in one jurisdiction, such approval does not guarantee that we will be able to obtain or maintain regulatory approval in any other jurisdiction, but a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one jurisdiction may have a negative effect on the regulatory approval process in others. For example, even if AIFA grants marketing approval of a product candidate, comparable regulatory authorities in foreign jurisdictions, including the FDA, must also approve the manufacturing, marketing, and promotion of the product candidate in those countries.

Approval procedures vary among jurisdictions and can involve requirements and administrative review periods different from those in Italy, including additional non-clinical studies or clinical trials as investigations conducted in one jurisdiction may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions. In many jurisdictions, a product candidate must be approved for reimbursement before it can be approved for sale in that jurisdiction. In some cases, the price that we intend to charge for our products is also subject to approval. These regulatory procedures can result in substantial delays in such countries. In other countries, product approval depends on showing superiority to an approved alternative therapy. This can result in significant expense for conducting complex clinical trials.

Approval of a product candidate in Italy by AIFA does not ensure approval of such product candidate by the FDA, EMA, or other regulatory authorities in other countries or jurisdictions, and approval by EMA or another regulatory authority does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other foreign countries or by the FDA. Sales of our product candidates outside of the U.S. will be subject to foreign regulatory requirements governing clinical trials and marketing approval. Even if the FDA grants marketing approval for a product candidate, comparable regulatory authorities of foreign countries also must approve the manufacturing and marketing of the product candidates in those countries. Approval procedures vary among jurisdictions and can involve requirements and administrative review periods different from, and more onerous than, those in the U.S., including additional preclinical studies or clinical trials. In many countries outside the U.S., a product candidate must be approved for reimbursement before it can be approved for sale in that country. In some cases, the price that we intend to charge for our products, if approved, is also subject to approval. We intend to submit an MAA to EMA for approval of our product candidates in the E.U. but obtaining such approval from the European Commission following the opinion of EMA is a lengthy and expensive process. Even if a product candidate is approved, the FDA or the European Commission may limit the indications for which the product may be marketed, require extensive warnings on the product labeling or require expensive and time consuming additional clinical trials or reporting as conditions of approval. Regulatory authorities in countries outside of the U.S. and E.U. also have requirements for approval of product candidates with which we must comply prior to marketing in those countries. Obtaining foreign regulatory approvals and compliance with foreign regulatory requirements could result in significant delays, difficulties, and costs for us and could delay or prevent the introduction of our product candidates in certain countries.

Finally, we do not have any products approved for sale in any jurisdiction, including international markets, and we do not have experience in obtaining regulatory approval. If we, or any third parties with whom we work, fail to comply with regulatory requirements in the U.S. or international markets or to obtain and maintain required approvals or if regulatory approvals in international markets are delayed, our target market may be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of our products will likely be harmed. The inability to meet continuously evolving regulatory standards for approval may result in our failing to obtain regulatory approval to market our current product candidates, which could significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.

Additionally, on June 23, 2016, the electorate in the United Kingdom voted in favor of leaving the E.U., commonly referred to as “Brexit.” On March 29, 2017, the country formally notified the E.U. of its intention to withdraw pursuant to Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty and the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the E.U. took effect on January 31, 2020. There was a transition period, during which E.U. pharmaceutical law remained applicable in the United Kingdom, however this ended on December 31, 2020. Since a significant proportion of the regulatory framework governing the development and commercialization of medicinal products in the United Kingdom is derived from E.U. Directives and Regulations, Brexit, now that the transition period is over, could materially impact the regulatory regime with respect to the approval of our product candidates in the United Kingdom or the E.U., as United Kingdom legislation now has the potential to diverge from E.U. legislation. Any delay in obtaining, or an inability to obtain, any regulatory approvals, because of Brexit or otherwise, would prevent us from commercializing our product candidates in the United Kingdom and/or the E.U. and restrict our ability to generate revenue and achieve and sustain profitability. If any of these outcomes occur, we may be forced to restrict or delay efforts to seek regulatory approval in the United Kingdom and/or E.U. for our product candidates, which could significantly and materially harm our business.

We operate in a rapidly changing industry and face significant competition, which may result in others discovering, developing, or commercializing products before or more successfully than we do.

The development and commercialization of new biopharmaceutical products is highly competitive and subject to rapid and significant technological advancements. We face competition from major multi-national pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies and specialty pharmaceutical companies with respect to our current and future product candidates that we may develop and commercialize in the future. There are several large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that currently market and sell products or are pursuing the development of product candidates for the treatment of cancer. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large, established companies. Potential competitors also include academic institutions, government agencies and other public and private research organizations. Our competitors may succeed in developing, acquiring, or licensing technologies and products that are more effective, more effectively marketed and sold or less costly than any product candidates that we may develop, which could render our product candidates noncompetitive and obsolete.

Many of our competitors, either alone or with their strategic collaborators, have substantially greater financial, technical, and human resources than we do. Accordingly, our competitors may be more successful than we are in obtaining approval for treatments and achieving widespread market acceptance, which may render our treatments obsolete or noncompetitive. Mergers and acquisitions in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and establishing clinical study sites and patient registration for clinical studies, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs.

Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient or are less expensive or better reimbursed than any products that we may commercialize. Our competitors also may obtain EMA, FDA, or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we do, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position for either the product or a specific indication before we are able to enter the market.

Our product candidates may face competition sooner than anticipated from biosimilar products.

Even if we are successful in achieving regulatory approval to commercialize a product candidate faster than our competitors, our product candidates may face competition from biosimilar products. In the U.S., our product candidates are regulated by the FDA as biologic products, and we intend to seek approval for these product candidates pursuant to the BLA pathway. The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (the “BPCIA”) created an abbreviated pathway for the approval of biosimilar and interchangeable biologic products. The abbreviated regulatory pathway establishes legal authority for the FDA to review and approve biosimilar biologics, including the possible designation of a biosimilar as “interchangeable” based on its similarity to an existing brand product. Under the BPCIA, an application for a biosimilar product cannot be approved by the FDA until 12 years after the original branded product was approved under a BLA. The law is complex and is still being interpreted and implemented by the FDA. As a result, its ultimate impact, implementation, and meaning are subject to uncertainty.

There is a risk that any exclusivity we may be afforded if any of our product candidates are approved as a biologic product under a BLA could be shortened due to congressional action, the results of recent litigation, or otherwise, or that the FDA will not consider our product candidates to be reference products for competing products, potentially creating the opportunity for generic or biosimilar competition sooner than anticipated. Moreover, the extent to which a biosimilar product, once approved, will be substituted for any one of our reference products in a way that is like traditional generic substitution for non-biologic products is not yet clear, and will depend on a number of marketplace and regulatory factors that are still developing. In addition, a competitor could decide to forego the biosimilar approval path and submit a full BLA after completing its own preclinical studies and clinical trials. In such cases, any exclusivity to which we may be eligible under the BPCIA would not prevent the competitor from marketing its product as soon as it is approved.

In addition, critics of the 12-year exclusivity period in the biosimilar pathway law will likely continue to seek to shorten the data exclusivity period and/or to encourage the FDA to interpret narrowly the law’s provisions regarding which new products receive data exclusivity. In December 2019, the U.S. agreed to remove from the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement a requirement for at least 10 years of data exclusivity for biologic products. Also, the FDA is considering whether subsequent changes to a licensed biologic would be protected by the remainder of the reference product’s original 12-year exclusivity period (a concept known in the generic drug context as “umbrella exclusivity”). If the FDA were to decide that umbrella exclusivity does not apply to biological reference products or were to make other changes to the exclusivity period, this could expose us to biosimilar competition at an earlier time. There also have been, and may continue to be, legislative and regulatory efforts to promote competition through policies enabling easier generic and biosimilar approval and commercialization, including efforts to lower standards for demonstrating biosimilarity or interchangeability, limit patents that may be litigated and/or patent settlements and implement preferential reimbursement policies for biosimilars.

In Europe, the European Commission has granted marketing authorizations for several biosimilar products pursuant to a set of general and product class-specific guidelines for biosimilar approvals issued over the past few years. In the European Economic Area (“EEA”), innovative medicinal products generally receive eight years of data exclusivity and an additional two years of marketing exclusivity. Data exclusivity prevents biosimilar applicants from referencing the innovator’s preclinical and clinical trial data when applying for a biosimilar marketing authorization, during a period of eight years from the date on which the reference product was first authorized in the EEA. During the additional two-year period of market exclusivity, biosimilar marketing authorization can be submitted, and the innovator’s data may be referenced, but no biosimilar product can be marketed until the expiration of the market exclusivity period. This 10-year marketing exclusivity period may be extended to 11 years if, during the first eight of those 10 years, the marketing authorization holder obtains an approval for one or more new therapeutic indications that bring significant clinical benefits compared with existing therapies. However, even if an innovative medicinal product gains the prescribed period of data exclusivity, another company may market another version of the product if such company obtained marketing authorization based on an application with a complete independent data package of pharmaceutical tests, preclinical tests and clinical trials. In addition, companies may be developing biosimilar products in other countries that could compete with our products, if approved.

If competitors can obtain marketing approval for biosimilars referencing our product candidates, if approved, such products may become subject to competition from such biosimilars, with the attendant competitive pressure and potential adverse consequences. Such competitive products may be able to immediately compete with us in each indication for which our product candidates may have received approval.

If product liability lawsuits are brought against us, we may incur substantial liabilities, even if we have appropriate insurance policies, and we may be required to limit commercialization of our product candidates.

We are exposed to potential product liability and professional indemnity risks that are inherent in the research, development, manufacturing, marketing, and use of biopharmaceutical and biotechnology products. Currently, we have no products that have been approved for marketing or commercialization; however, the use of our product candidates in clinical trials, and the sale of these product candidates, if approved, in the future, may expose us to liability claims. Product liability claims may be brought against us or our partners by participants enrolled in our clinical trials, patients, health care providers, biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, our collaborators or others using, administering, or selling any of our future approved products. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against any such claims, we may incur substantial liabilities, even if we have product liability or other applicable insurance policies in effect. We may not be able to maintain adequate levels of insurance for these liabilities at reasonable cost and/or reasonable terms. Excessive insurance costs or uninsured claims would add to our future operating expenses and adversely affect our financial condition. As a result of such lawsuits and their potential results, we may be required to limit commercialization of our product candidates. Regardless of the merits or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:

Gene therapies are novel, complex and difficult to manufacture. We could experience production problems that result in delays in our development or commercialization programs or otherwise adversely affect our business.

Biological products are inherently difficult to manufacture, and gene therapy products are complex biological products, the development and manufacture of which necessitates substantial expertise and capital investment.

Temferon is individually manufactured for each patient using complex processes in specialized facilities. Our production process requires a variety of raw materials, some of which are highly specialized, including the viral vector that encodes for the therapeutic payload. Some of these raw materials have limited and, in some cases, sole suppliers. Even though we plan to have back-up supplies of raw materials whenever possible, we cannot be certain such supplies will be sufficient if our primary sources are unavailable. A shortage of a critical raw material or a technical issue during manufacturing may lead to delays in clinical development or commercialization of our product candidates.

Our product candidate, Temferon, is being studied for GBM patients with unmethylated methylguanine methyltransferase (“MGMT”) status, as determined by a laboratory test. If approved for use only in uMGMT-GBM patients, use of such a laboratory test would be required for each patient before treatment with Temferon. There are several currently marketed, CE-marked tests for uMGMT status in the E.U., one or more of which may be used in our clinical trials and which we would expect to be used in clinical practice upon approval of Temferon. If a regulatory authority were, however, to deem that no currently-available tests are appropriate for use with Temferon, or if appropriate tests were to become commercially unavailable, we might be required to develop and obtain regulatory approval for our own version of such a companion diagnostic test, or work with another entity to develop such a test, in which case we could experience significant delays in obtaining regulatory approval or interruptions in our ability to market Temferon.

Several factors could cause production interruptions, including equipment malfunctions, facility contamination, raw material shortages or contamination, natural disasters, disruption in utility services, human error, or disruptions in the operations of our suppliers. We have limited experience manufacturing our product candidates. We have contracted with a third party CMO for the manufacture of our viral vectors and certain of our drug products for clinical trials. We expect this CMO will be capable of providing enough of our viral vectors and gene therapy products to meet the anticipated scales for our clinical trials, in due course, and commercial demands, if approved. However, to meet our projected needs for further commercial manufacturing and large-scale clinical trials, third parties with whom we currently work might need to increase their scale and frequency of production, and we will likely need to secure alternate suppliers or develop our own capabilities. We believe that there are alternate sources of supply that can satisfy our requirements, although we cannot be certain that identifying and establishing relationships with such sources, if necessary, would not result in significant delay or material additional costs.

All manufacturers of pharmaceutical products must comply with strictly enforced requirements and complex regulations. Any failure by our CMO to adhere to or document compliance to such regulatory requirements could lead to a delay or interruption in the availability of our product candidate for clinical trials or result in sanctions, including clinical holds, fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, license revocation, seizures or recalls of raw materials, product candidates or products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which could have significant adverse consequences on us. Our potential future dependence upon others for the manufacture of our gene therapies may also adversely affect our future profit margins and our ability to commercialize any product candidates that receive regulatory approval on a timely and competitive basis.

Delays in obtaining regulatory approval of our or our CMOs’ manufacturing process and facility or disruptions in our manufacturing process may delay or disrupt our commercialization efforts.

Before we can begin to commercially manufacture our viral vector or product candidates in our own facility, or the facility of a CMO, we must obtain regulatory approval from AIFA and eventually the FDA, EMA, or other regulatory authorities for our manufacturing processes and for the facility in which manufacturing is performed. A manufacturing authorization must also be obtained from the appropriate regulatory authorities. In addition, we must pass a pre-approval inspection of our or our CMOs manufacturing facility by AIFA, the FDA, EMA, or other relevant regulatory authorities before any of our gene therapy product candidates can obtain marketing approval. To obtain approval, we will need to ensure that all of our processes, quality systems, methods, equipment policies and procedures are compliant with GMP, and perform extensive audits of vendors, contract laboratories, CMOs and suppliers. If any of our vendors, contract laboratories, CMOs or suppliers is found to be out of compliance with GMP, 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 GMP requirements govern quality control of the manufacturing process and documentation policies and procedures. In complying with GMP, 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 will be subject to possible regulatory action and may not be permitted to sell any products that we may develop.

Failure to comply with ongoing regulatory requirements could cause us to suspend production or put in place costly or time-consuming remedial measures.

The regulatory authorities may, at any time following approval of a product for sale, audit the manufacturing facilities for such a product. If any such inspection or audit identifies a failure to comply with applicable regulations, or if a violation of product specifications or applicable regulations occurs independent of such an inspection or audit, the relevant regulatory authority may require remedial measures that may be costly or time-consuming to implement and that may include the temporary or permanent suspension of a clinical trial or commercial sales or the temporary or permanent closure of a manufacturing facility. Any such remedial measures imposed upon our CMO or us could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

If our CMOs or we fail to comply with applicable GMP regulations, AIFA, the FDA, EMA or other regulatory authorities can impose regulatory sanctions including, among other things, refusal to approve a pending application for a new product candidate or suspension or revocation of a pre-existing approval. Such an occurrence may cause our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects to be harmed.

Additionally, if supply from any CMO or us is delayed or interrupted, there could be a significant disruption in the clinical or commercial supply of our product candidates. We have agreements in place with our CMO pursuant to which we are collaborating on GMP manufacturing processes and analytical methods for the manufacture and release of our viral vectors and certain drug products. Therefore, if we are unable to enter into an agreement with our CMO to manufacture clinical or commercial material for our product programs, or if our agreement with our CMOs were terminated, we would have to find suitable alternative manufacturers. This could delay our or our collaborators’ ability to conduct clinical trials or commercialize our current and future product candidates. The regulatory authorities also may require additional clinical trials and other nonclinical and or analytical evaluations if a new manufacturer is relied upon for clinical or commercial production. Switching manufacturers may involve substantial costs, require significant comparability studies, and could result in a delay in our desired clinical and commercial timelines.

Any contamination in our manufacturing process, shortages of materials or failure of any of our key suppliers to deliver necessary components could result in interruption in the supply of our product candidates and delays in our clinical development or commercialization schedules.

Given the nature of biological manufacturing, there is a risk of contamination in our manufacturing processes. Any contamination could materially adversely affect our ability to produce product candidates on schedule and could, therefore, harm the results of operations and cause reputational damage.

Some of the materials required in our manufacturing process are derived from biologic sources. Such materials are difficult to procure and may be subject to contamination or recall. A material shortage, contamination, recall or restriction on the use of biologically derived substances in the manufacture of our product candidates could adversely impact or disrupt the commercial manufacturing or the production of clinical material, which could materially and adversely affect our development timelines and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Patients’ cellular source material must be transported from the clinical collection site to the manufacturing facility and the cryopreserved drug product must be returned to the clinical site for administration into the patient using controlled temperature shipping containers.

Once collected from the patient, the cellular source material must be transported to the manufacturing facility using a shipping container that maintains the material at a required temperature and be delivered typically within three days of collection. While we intend to use reputable couriers and agents for the transport of such materials, if the shipping container is opened or damaged such that the required temperature is not maintained, the cellular source material may be adversely impacted, and it may not be feasible to manufacture a drug product for the patient. Similarly, if a shipment is delayed due to adverse weather, misrouting, other events or held up at a customs point, the cellular source material may not be delivered within a time window that will allow for its use for the successful manufacture of a drug product. Similarly, the patient’s autologous drug product must be returned to the clinical site for administration into the patient using a specialized shipping container that maintains the material at a very low temperature for a period of typically up to ten days. While we intend to use reputable couriers and agents for the transport of our drug products, if the shipping container is opened or damaged such that the very low temperature is not maintained, the drug product may be adversely impacted, and it may be unsuitable for administration to the patient or harmful. Similarly, if a shipment is delayed due to adverse weather, misrouting, held up at customs or other events, and is not delivered to the clinical site within the time period that the very low temperature is maintained, the drug product may be unsuitable for administration to the patient or harmful.

Our gene therapies are for autologous use only. Therefore, if a drug product is administered to the wrong patient, the patient could suffer harm.

Our gene therapies are autologous, so they must be administered back only to the patient from which the cellular source material was collected. While we implement specific identifiers, lot numbers and labels with cross checks for our products and operations from collection of cellular source material, through manufacture of drug product, transport of product to the clinical site up to thawing and administration of the product, it is possible that a product may be administered into the wrong patient. If an autologous gene therapies were to be administered into the wrong patient, the patient could suffer harm, including experiencing a severe adverse immune reaction and this event, should it happen, could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Our focus on developing our current product candidates may not yield any commercially viable products, and our failure to successfully identify and develop additional product candidates could impair our ability to grow.

As part of our growth strategy, we intend to identify, develop, and market additional product candidates beyond our existing product candidate, namely Temferon. We may spend several years completing our development of any current or future product candidates, and failure can occur at any stage. The product candidates to which we allocate our resources may not end up being successful. Because we have limited resources, we may forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with certain programs or product candidates or for indications that later prove to have greater commercial potential than Temferon or our other product candidates. Our spending on current and future research and development programs may not yield any commercially viable product candidates. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through collaborations, licensing arrangements, joint ventures, strategic alliances, partnerships, or other arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such product candidate. If any of these events occur, we may be forced to abandon our development efforts with respect to a particular product candidate or fail to develop a potentially successful product candidate.

In addition, certain of our current or future product candidates may not demonstrate in patients any or all the pharmacological benefits we believe they may possess or compare favorably to existing, approved therapies. We have not yet succeeded and may never succeed in demonstrating efficacy and safety of our product candidates or any future product candidates in preclinical studies, clinical trials or in obtaining marketing approval thereafter and, therefore, may not result in the discovery and development of commercially viable products.

If we are unsuccessful in our development efforts, we may not be able to advance the development of our product candidates, commercialize products, raise capital, expand our business, or continue our operations.

Risks Related to Our Reliance on Third Parties

We utilize, and expect to continue to utilize, third parties to conduct some or all aspects of our vector production and product manufacturing for the foreseeable future, and these third parties may not perform satisfactorily.

We currently rely on our CMO to produce our viral vectors and certain of our drug products for our ongoing clinical trials and preclinical studies. For future clinical trials, we intend to utilize materials manufactured by GMP-compliant CMOs. If our partners do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines or manufacture our viral vector and product candidates in accordance with regulatory requirements or if there are disagreements between us and our CMO, we will not be able to complete, or may be delayed in completing, the clinical trials required to support approval of our product candidates or AIFA, the FDA, EMA, or other regulatory agencies may refuse to accept our clinical or preclinical data. In such instances, we may need to enter an appropriate replacement third party relationship, which may not be readily available or available on acceptable terms, which would cause additional delay or increased expense prior to the approval of our product candidates and would thereby have a negative impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We have partnered with a commercial GMP-compliant CMO and intend to utilize viral vectors and gene therapy products manufactured by such CMO for our future clinical trials and products for which we obtain marketing approval. There is no assurance that our CMO, or any other future third party manufacturer that we engage, will be successful in producing any or all of our viral vector or product candidates, that any such product will, if required, pass the required comparability testing, or that any materials produced by any other third-party manufacturer that we engage will have the same effect in patients that we have observed to date. We believe that our manufacturing network will have sufficient capacity to meet demand for our clinical and existing and expected initial commercial needs, but there is a risk that if supplies are interrupted or result in poor yield or quality, it would materially harm our business. Additionally, if the gene therapy industry were to grow, we may encounter increasing competition for the raw materials and consumables necessary to produce our product candidates. Furthermore, demand for CMO GMP manufacturing capabilities may grow at a faster rate than existing manufacturing capacity, which could disrupt our ability to find and retain third party manufacturers capable of producing sufficient quantities of our viral vectors or product candidates for future clinical trials or to meet expected initial commercial demand.

Under certain circumstances, our current CMO is entitled to terminate its engagements with us. If we need to enter alternative arrangements, it could delay our development activities. Our reliance on our CMO for certain manufacturing activities will reduce our control over these activities but will not relieve us of our responsibility to ensure compliance with all required regulations. In addition to our current CMO, we may rely on additional third parties to manufacture ingredients of our viral vectors and/or drug product in the future and to perform quality testing, and reliance on these third parties entails risks including:

Any of these events could lead to clinical trial delays or failure to obtain regulatory approval or impact our ability to successfully commercialize any of our product candidates. Some of these events could be the basis for AIFA, the FDA, EMA, or other regulatory authority action, including injunction, recall, seizure or total or partial suspension of product manufacture.

We rely on third parties to conduct our preclinical and clinical studies and perform other tasks for us. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines or comply with regulatory requirements, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize our product candidates and our business could be substantially harmed.

We do not expect to independently conduct all aspects of our lentiviral vector protocol development, research, and preclinical and clinical testing. We currently rely, and plan to continue to rely, upon third party CROs to monitor and manage data for our ongoing preclinical and clinical programs. Pursuant to the amended and restated license agreement with OSR, we agreed to use OSR as the primary site in any preclinical study or clinical trial (including all phases thereof) relating to any licensed products in the field of use, subject to OSR maintaining any required quality standards and providing its services on customary and reasonable terms and consistent with then-applicable market standards. We rely on these parties, including OSR, for execution of our preclinical and clinical studies, but we can only control limited aspects of their activities. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our studies 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 and other vendors are required to comply with current GMP, GCP, and Good Laboratory Practices (“GLP”), which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA, the Competent Authorities of the Member States of the EEA, and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for all our product candidates in clinical development. Regulatory authorities enforce these regulations through periodic inspections of study sponsors, principal investigators, study sites and other contractors. If we or any of our CROs or vendors fail to comply with applicable regulations, the clinical data generated in our clinical studies may be deemed unreliable and AIFA, the FDA, EMA, or other comparable regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical studies before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our clinical studies comply with GCP regulations. In addition, our clinical studies must be conducted with product candidates which are produced under GMP regulations. Our failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical studies, which would delay the regulatory approval process.

We and our collaborators and contract manufacturers are subject to significant regulation with respect to manufacturing our product candidates. The manufacturing facilities on which we rely may not meet regulatory requirements and have limited capacity.

Contract manufacturers and their facilities are required to comply with extensive regulatory requirements, including ensuring that quality control and manufacturing procedures conform to GMPs. These GMP regulations cover all aspects of manufacturing relating to our product candidates and components used in clinical studies. These regulations govern manufacturing processes and procedures (including record keeping) and the implementation and operation of quality systems to control and assure the quality of investigational product candidates and products approved for sale. Poor control of production processes can lead to the introduction of contaminants or to inadvertent changes in the properties or stability of our product candidates that may not be detectable in final product testing. We, our collaborators, or our contract manufacturers must supply all necessary documentation in support of a BLA or MAA on a timely basis and must adhere to GLP and GMP regulations enforced by AIFA, the FDA, EMA, and other regulatory authorities through their facilities inspection program. The facilities and quality systems of some or all our collaborators and third-party contractors must pass a pre-approval inspection for compliance with the applicable regulations as a condition of regulatory approval of our product candidates or any of our other potential product candidates. In addition, the regulatory authorities may, at any time, audit or inspect a manufacturing facility involved with the preparation of our product candidates or our other potential product candidates or the associated quality systems for compliance with the regulations applicable to the activities being conducted. We do not control the manufacturing process of, and are completely dependent on, our contract manufacturing partners for compliance with the regulatory requirements. If these facilities do not pass a pre-approval plant inspection, regulatory approval of the product candidates may not be granted or may be substantially delayed until any violations are corrected to the satisfaction of the regulatory authority, if ever. Moreover, if our contract manufacturers fail to achieve and maintain high manufacturing standards, in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements, or there are substantial manufacturing errors, this could result in patient injury or death, product shortages, product recalls or withdrawals, delays or failures in product testing or delivery, cost overruns or other problems that could seriously harm our business.

We are dependent on a limited number of suppliers and, in some instances, a sole supplier, for some of our components and materials used in our product candidates.

We currently depend on a limited number of suppliers and, in some instances, a sole supplier, for some of the components and equipment necessary to produce our viral vectors and drug product. We cannot be sure that these suppliers will remain in business, or that they will not be purchased by one of our competitors or another company that is not interested in continuing to produce these materials for our intended purpose. Our use of a sole or a limited number of suppliers of raw materials, components and finished goods exposes us to several risks, including disruptions in supply, price increases, late deliveries, and an inability to meet customer demand. There are, in general, relatively few alternative sources of supply for these components, and in some cases, no alternatives. These vendors may be unable or unwilling to meet our future demands for our clinical trials or commercial sale. Establishing additional or replacement suppliers for these components could take a substantial amount of time and it may be difficult to establish replacement suppliers who meet regulatory requirements. Any disruption in supply from any supplier or manufacturing location could lead to supply delays or interruptions which would damage our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

If we are required to switch to a replacement supplier, the manufacture and delivery of our viral vectors and product candidates could be interrupted for an extended period, adversely affecting our business. Establishing additional or replacement suppliers may not be accomplished quickly. If we can find a replacement supplier, the replacement supplier would need to be qualified and may require additional regulatory authority approval, which could result in further delay. For example, AIFA, the FDA, EMA, or other regulatory authorities could require additional supplemental data, manufacturing data and comparability data up to and including clinical trial data if we rely upon a new supplier. We may be unsuccessful in demonstrating the comparability of clinical supplies which could require the conduct of additional clinical trials. While we seek to maintain adequate inventory of the components and materials used in our product candidates, any interruption or delay in the supply of components or materials, or our inability to obtain components or materials from alternate sources at acceptable prices in a timely manner, could impair our ability to conduct our clinical trials and, if our product candidates are approved, to meet the demand of our customers and cause them to cancel orders.

In addition, as part of the regulatory process for approval of our product candidates, the regulatory authorities must review and approve the individual components of our production process, which includes raw materials, the manufacturing processes, and facilities of our suppliers. Some of our current suppliers have not undergone this process nor have they had any components included in any product approved by regulatory authorities.

Our reliance on these suppliers subjects us to a number of risks that could harm our reputation, business, and financial condition, including, among other things:

If any of these risks materialize, costs could significantly increase and our ability to conduct our clinical trials and, if our product candidates are approved, to meet demand for our products could be impacted.

Any collaborations, licensing arrangements, joint ventures, strategic alliances, or partnerships that we may enter in the future may not be successful, which could adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our current and potential future product candidates.

We may seek collaborations, licensing arrangements, joint ventures, strategic alliances or partnerships with biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies or other third parties for the development or commercialization of our current and potential future product candidates. We may enter these transactions or arrangements on a selective basis depending on the merits of retaining commercialization rights for ourselves as compared to entering selective transactions or arrangements with other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies or other third parties for each product candidate, both in the U.S. and internationally. To the extent that we decide to enter these transactions or arrangements, we will face significant competition in seeking appropriate collaborators. Moreover, collaborations or alternative transactions or arrangements are complex, and time consuming to negotiate, document and implement. We may not be successful in our efforts to establish and implement collaborations or other alternative transactions or arrangements should we choose to enter into such transactions or arrangements. The terms of any collaborations or other transactions or arrangements that we may establish may not be favorable to us.

Additionally, we may not be able to exercise sole decision-making authority regarding the transaction or arrangement, which could create the potential risk of creating impasses on decisions, and our collaborators may have economic or business interests or goals that are, or that may become, inconsistent with our business interests or goals. It is possible that conflicts may arise with our collaborators, such as conflicts concerning the achievement of performance milestones, or the interpretation of significant terms under any agreement, such as those related to financial obligations, the ownership or control of intellectual property developed during the collaboration or the scope of our or our collaborators’ other rights or obligations related to development or commercialization activities. If any conflicts arise with our current or future collaborators, they may act in their self-interest, which may be averse to our best interest, and they may breach their obligations to us. In addition, we have limited control over the amount and timing of resources that our current collaborators or any future collaborators devote to our collaborators’ or our future products. Disagreements between us and our collaborators can lead to delays in the development process or commercializing the applicable product candidate or product, may result in litigation or arbitration, which would increase our expenses and divert the attention of our management, and may result in termination or dissolution of the transaction or arrangement and, in such event, we may not continue to have rights to the product candidate or products relating to such transaction or arrangement or may need to purchase such rights at a premium. These disagreements can be difficult to resolve if neither of the parties has final decision-making authority.

Collaborations with biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies and other third parties often are terminated or allowed to expire by the other party. Any such termination or expiration could adversely affect us financially and could harm our business reputation.

Our reliance on third parties requires us to share our trade secrets, which increases the possibility that a competitor will discover them or that our trade secrets will be misappropriated or otherwise disclosed.

Because we rely on third parties to develop and manufacture our product candidates, we must, at times, share trade secrets with them. We seek to protect our proprietary technology in part by entering into confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, material transfer agreements, collaborative research agreements, consulting agreements or other similar agreements with our collaborators, advisors, employees, and consultants prior to beginning research or disclosing proprietary information. These agreements typically limit the rights of the third parties to use or disclose our confidential information, such as trade secrets. Despite the contractual provisions employed when working with third parties, the need to share trade secrets and other confidential information increases the risk that such trade secrets become known by our competitors, are inadvertently incorporated into the technology of others, or are disclosed or used in violation of these agreements. Given that our proprietary position is based, in part, on our know-how and trade secrets, a competitor’s discovery of our trade secrets or other unauthorized use or disclosure would impair our competitive position and may have a material adverse effect on our business.

In addition, these agreements typically restrict the ability of our collaborators, advisors, employees, and consultants to publish data potentially relating to our trade secrets. Our principal investigators, physicians and academic collaborators typically have rights to publish data, if we are notified in advance and may delay publication for a specified time in order to secure our intellectual property rights arising from the collaboration. Despite our efforts to protect our trade secrets, our competitors may discover our trade secrets, either through breach of these agreements, independent development or publication of information including our trade secrets in cases where we do not have proprietary or otherwise protected rights at the time of publication. A competitor’s discovery of our trade secrets would impair our competitive position and have an adverse impact on our business.

Risks Related to Intellectual Property

We depend on a license agreement with OSR to permit us to use patents and patent applications, as well as to exploit specific OSR know-how. Termination of these rights or the failure to comply with obligations under this agreement could materially harm our business and prevent us from developing or commercializing our product candidates (Temferon in particular).

We are party to an amended and restated license agreement (the “ARLA”) with OSR under which we were granted rights to patents and patent applications, as well as proprietary technologies, that are important and necessary to our business, including our Temferon based product candidates. Our rights to use these patents and patent applications and employ the inventions claimed in these licensed patents, as well as the exploitation of OSR proprietary technology, are subject to the continuation of, and our compliance with, the terms of the ARLA.

The ARLA imposes upon us various diligence, payment and other obligations, including the following:

We do not currently own any patents, and we are heavily reliant upon the ARLA to licensed patents that are important or necessary to the development of our technology and product candidates, including the patents relating to Temferon. Our license is exclusive only to specific fields of use, namely: the field(s) of Interferon (“IFN”) gene therapy by lentiviral based-HSPC gene transfer with respect to (a) any Solid Cancer Indication (as defined in the ARLA) (including GBM and solid liver cancer) and/or (b) any Lympho-Hematopoietic Indication (as defined in the ARLA) for which we exercise an option to be included as part of the field of use, as provided in the ARLA; and (2) certain specified gene therapy products developed during the license term for use in the aforementioned field(s). Although we have exclusive option rights to license additional fields of use, or indications, upon the payment of additional fees to OSR, there is no guarantee that we will be in a position to do so within the time period specified to exercise such right.

We do not control the preparation, prosecution and maintenance of the licensed patent rights under the ARLA, or the enforcement of the licensed patent rights and know-how rights against infringement by third parties. Thus, the licensed patent rights were not drafted by us or our attorneys, and we do not control or have any input into the prosecution of these patent rights. We cannot be certain that drafting or prosecution of the licensed patent rights has been conducted in compliance with applicable laws and regulations or will result in valid and enforceable patents. OSR maintains control of the preparation, prosecution and maintenance of the licensed patent rights, and controls enforcement of the licensed patent rights and know-how rights.

Pursuant to the ARLA, OSR may terminate the agreement in the event we breach certain of our obligations or fail to make certain payments and upon our liquidation. In addition, OSR may terminate our rights as to certain fields of use for our failure to achieve certain development milestones for specified licensed products within certain time periods. In addition, OSR may terminate the agreement in the event that commercialization of a licensed product is not started within 24 months from the grant of both (i) the MAA approval and (ii) the pricing approval of such licensed product, provided that such termination will relate solely to such licensed product and to such country or region to which both such MAA approval and pricing approval were granted. If the ARLA is terminated, we may not be able to develop, manufacture, market or sell the product candidates covered by the agreement and those being tested or approved in combination with such products. Such an occurrence could materially adversely affect the value of the product candidates being developed under the ARLA.

Disputes may arise regarding intellectual property subject to, and any of our rights and obligations under, the ARLA or any other license or other strategic agreement, including:

In addition, the agreements under which we license intellectual property or technology to or from third parties are complex, and certain provisions in such agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations. The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology or increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Moreover, if disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on commercially acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates.

Our business also would suffer if any current or future licensors fail to abide by the terms of the license, if the licensors fail to enforce licensed patents against infringing third parties, if the licensed patents or other rights are found to be invalid or unenforceable, or if we are unable to enter necessary licenses on acceptable terms. Moreover, our licensors may own or control intellectual property that has not been licensed to us, and as a result, we may be subject to claims, regardless of their merit, that we are infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating the licensor’s rights.

In addition, if we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property rights or maintain the existing intellectual property rights we have, we may have to seek alternative options, such as developing new product candidates with design-around technologies, which may require more time and investment, or abandon development of the relevant research programs or product candidates and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could suffer.

We have been granted licenses in certain fields of use to patent applications. There can be no assurance that any of the patent applications for which we have licenses will result in issued patents. As a result, our ability to protect our proprietary technology in the marketplace may be limited.

We have been granted licenses in certain fields of use to patent applications in many countries worldwide. These applications cover a range of areas including applications relating, in general terms, to the use of gene vectors comprising a miRNA target sequence, and the use of gene vectors comprising an interferon-alpha transgene operably linked to a miRNA-130a or miRNA-126 target sequence. Unless and until the pending patent applications are issued, their protective scope is impossible to determine. It is also impossible to predict whether or how many of the patent applications will result in issued patents. Even if pending applications are issued, they may be issued with coverage significantly narrower than what is currently sought.

Our proprietary position for our product candidates currently depends in part upon licenses to patents protecting methods of use, which may not prevent a competitor or other third party from using the same product candidate for another use.

Composition of matter patent claims on the active pharmaceutical ingredient (“API”) in pharmaceutical drug products are generally considered to be the favored form of intellectual property protection for pharmaceutical products, as such patents generally provide protection without regard to any method of use, manufacture or formulation of the API used. Method of use patent claims protect the use of a product for the specified method and dosing. These types of patent claims do not prevent a competitor or other third party from making and marketing an identical API for an indication that is outside the scope of the method claims or from developing a different dosing regimen. Moreover, even if competitors or other third parties do not actively promote their product for our targeted indications or uses for which we may obtain patents, physicians may recommend that patients use these products off-label, or patients may do so themselves. Although off-label use may infringe or contribute to the infringement of method of use patents, the practice is common and such infringement is difficult to prevent or prosecute.

Even if patents are issued based on patent applications to which we have been granted a license, because the patent positions of pharmaceutical and biotechnology products are complex and uncertain, we cannot predict the scope and extent of patent protection for our product candidates.

Any patents that may be issued based on patent applications that we have been granted licenses to will not ensure sufficient protection with respect to our activities for a number of reasons, including without limitation the following:

Obtaining and maintaining patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by governmental patent agencies, and patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for noncompliance with these requirements.

Periodic maintenance fees on any issued patent are due to be paid to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) and foreign Intellectual Property Offices in several stages over the term of the patent. Maintenance fees are also due for pending patent applications in some countries. The USPTO and various foreign governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment, and other similar provisions during the patent application process. While an inadvertent lapse can in many cases be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which noncompliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Noncompliance events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application include, but are not limited to, failure to respond to office actions within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents. In such an event, our competitors might be able to enter the market, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.

The life of patent protection is limited, and third parties could develop and commercialize products and technologies similar or identical to ours and compete directly with us after the patent licensed to us expires, which could materially and adversely affect our ability to commercialize our products and technologies.

The life of a patent and the protection it affords is limited. For example, in the U.S., if all maintenance fees are timely paid, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from its earliest U.S. non-provisional filing date. In Europe, the expiration of an invention patent is 20 years from its filing date. Even if we successfully obtain patent protection for an approved drug candidate, it may face competition from generic or biosimilar medications. Manufacturers of generic or biosimilar drugs may challenge the scope, validity or enforceability of the patents underlying our technology in court or before a patent office, and the patent holder may not be successful in enforcing or defending those intellectual property rights and, as a result, we may not be able to develop or market the relevant product candidate exclusively, which would materially adversely affect any potential sales of that product.

Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new drug candidates, patents protecting such drug candidates might expire before or shortly after such drug candidates are commercialized. As a result, the patents and patent applications licensed to us may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours. Even if we believe that the U.S. patents involved are eligible for certain (and time-limited) patent term extensions, there can be no assurance that the applicable authorities, including the FDA and the USPTO, and any equivalent regulatory authority in other countries, will agree with our assessment of whether such extensions are available, and such authorities may refuse to grant extensions to such patents, or may grant more limited extensions than requested. For example, depending upon the timing, duration, and specifics of any FDA marketing approval of any product candidates we may develop, one or more of the U.S. patents licensed to us may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Action of 1984 (the “Hatch-Waxman Amendments”). The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent extension term of up to five (5) years as compensation for patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process. A patent term extension cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval, only one patent may be extended and only those claims covering the approved drug, a method for using it, or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. However, we may not be granted an extension because of, for example, failing to exercise due diligence during the testing phase or regulatory review process, failing to apply within applicable deadlines, failing to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents, or otherwise failing to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the applicable period or the scope of patent protection afforded could be less than requested. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or term of any such extension is less than requested, our competitors may obtain approval of competing products following our patent expiration, and our business could be harmed. Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the U.S. and other countries may diminish the value of our patents or narrow the scope of our patent protection.

The patents and pending patent applications licensed to us for our product candidates are expected to expire on various dates as described in “Business— Intellectual Property.” Upon the expiration, we will not be able to assert such licensed patent rights against potential competitors, which would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We may need to license intellectual property from third parties, and such licenses may not be available or may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all.

There may be intellectual property rights existing now, or in the future, relevant to Temferon, or any other product candidates that we seek to commercialize or develop, if any, that may affect our ability to commercialize such product candidates. Although the Company is not aware of any such intellectual property rights, a third party may hold intellectual property rights, including patent rights, that are important or necessary to the development or manufacture of our product candidates. Even if all our main product candidates are covered by patents, it may be necessary for us to use the patented or proprietary technology of third parties to commercialize our product candidates, in which case we would be required to obtain a license from these third parties. Such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, and we could be forced to accept unfavorable contractual terms. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to redesign our technology, product candidates, or the methods for manufacturing them or to develop or license replacement technology, all of which may not be feasible on a technical or commercial basis. If we are unable to do so, our business could be harmed.

The licensing or acquisition of third party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and several more established companies may pursue strategies to license or acquire third party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive or necessary. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, capital resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign, or license rights to us. We also may be unable to license or acquire third party intellectual property rights on terms that would allow us to make an appropriate return on our investment or at all. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third party intellectual property rights or maintain the existing intellectual property rights we have, we may have to abandon development of the relevant program or product candidate, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

We may become involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our intellectual property, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful.

In addition to the possibility of litigation relating to infringement claims asserted against it, we may become a party to other patent litigation and other proceedings, including inter partes review proceedings, post-grant review proceedings, derivation proceedings declared by the USPTO and similar proceedings in foreign countries, regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our current or future technologies or product candidates or products. Pursuant to the ARLA, OSR has the right to enforce the patents at its own expense. However, if OSR fails to do so, we have the right to enforce the licensed patents in the field of use, at our expense. The cost to us of any patent litigation or other proceeding, even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their substantially greater financial resources. Patent litigation and other proceedings may also absorb significant management time. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could impair our ability to compete in the marketplace.

Competitors may infringe or otherwise violate our intellectual property. As a result, we may be required to file claims to stop third-party infringement or unauthorized use. Any such claims could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us, including claims alleging that we infringe their patents or other intellectual property rights, and/or that any of our intellectual property (“IP”), including licensed IP, is invalid and/or unenforceable. This can be prohibitively expensive, particularly for a company of our size, and time-consuming, and even if we are successful, any award of monetary damages or other remedy we may receive may not be commercially valuable. In addition, in an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that our asserted intellectual property is not valid, or is unenforceable, or may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our intellectual property does not cover its technology. An adverse determination in any litigation or defense proceedings could put our intellectual property at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and could put our patent applications at risk of not being issued.

If the breadth or strength of our patent or other intellectual property rights is compromised or threatened, it could allow third parties to exploit and commercialize our technology or products or result in our inability to exploit and/or commercialize our technology and products without infringing third-party intellectual property rights. Further, third parties may be dissuaded from collaborating with us.

Interference or derivation proceedings brought by the USPTO, or its foreign counterparts may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions with respect to our patent applications, and we may also become involved in other proceedings, such as re -examination proceedings, before the USPTO or its foreign counterparts. Due to the substantial competition in the pharmaceutical space, the number of such proceedings may increase. This could delay the prosecution of our pending patent applications or impact the validity and enforceability of any future patents that we may obtain. In addition, any such litigation, submission or proceeding may be resolved adversely to us and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distraction to our management.

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation, even if some jurisdictions have specific rules to maintain confidentiality during the proceedings. Moreover, intellectual property law relating to the fields in which we operate is still evolving and, consequently, patent, and other intellectual property rights in our industry, are subject to change and are often uncertain. We may not prevail in any of these suits or other efforts to protect our technology, and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially valuable. During this type of litigation, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, the market price for our common stock could be significantly harmed.

Intellectual property litigation could cause us to spend substantial resources and distract our personnel from their normal responsibilities.

Litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims, with or without merit, is unpredictable and generally expensive and time consuming and is likely to divert significant resources from our core business, including distracting our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a substantial adverse effect on the price of our common stock and negatively impact our ability to raise additional funds. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing, or distribution activities.

We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to adequately conduct such litigation or proceedings. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources and more mature and developed intellectual property portfolios. Accordingly, despite our efforts, we may not be able to prevent third parties from infringing upon or misappropriating or from successfully challenging our intellectual property rights. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete in the marketplace.

Any trademarks we may obtain may be infringed or successfully challenged, resulting in harm to our business.

We expect to rely on trademarks, including Temferon, as one means to distinguish any of our product candidates that are approved for marketing from the products of our competitors. Other than Temferon, which we have registered in the E.U. and the U.S., we have not yet selected trademarks for our product candidates and have not yet begun the process of applying to register trademarks for any other of our product candidates. Once we select trademarks and apply to register them, our trademark applications may not be approved. Third parties may oppose our trademark applications, or otherwise challenge our use of the trademarks. If our trademarks are successfully challenged, we could be forced to rebrand our products, which could result in loss of brand recognition and could require us to devote resources to advertising and marketing new brands. Our competitors may infringe upon our trademarks and we may not have adequate resources to enforce our trademarks.

In addition, any proprietary name we propose to use with our clinical-stage product candidates or any other product candidate in the U.S. must be approved by the FDA, regardless of whether we have registered it, or applied to register it, as a trademark. The FDA typically conducts a review of proposed product names, including an evaluation of the potential for confusion with other product names. If the FDA objects to any of our proposed proprietary product names, we may be required to expend significant additional resources to identify a suitable proprietary product name that would qualify under applicable trademark laws, not infringe the existing rights of third parties and be acceptable to the FDA. The EMA may also object to our proposed proprietary product name that infringes the existing rights of third parties.

If our trademarks and trade names are not adequately protected, then we may not be able to build name recognition in our markets of interest and our business may be adversely affected. Over the long term, if we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, then we may not be able to compete effectively, and our business may be adversely affected. Our efforts to enforce or protect our proprietary rights related to trademarks, trade secrets, domain names, copyrights or other intellectual property may be ineffective and could result in substantial costs and diversion of resources and could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We may not be able to enforce intellectual property rights throughout the world.

Filing, prosecuting, and defending patent applications and issued patents on product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and intellectual property rights that we have been granted licenses to in some countries outside the U.S. and Italy can be less extensive than those in the U.S. and Italy. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property to the same extent as laws in the U.S. and Italy. Consequently, we may not be able to seek to prevent third parties from practicing inventions that are the subject of patents that we have been granted licenses to in all countries outside the U.S. and Italy, or from selling or importing products made using inventions that are the subject of patents that we have been granted licenses to in and into the U.S. or other jurisdictions. Competitors, for example, may use technologies that are the subject of patents that we have been granted licenses to in jurisdictions where we have not licensed patents to develop their own products and further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have been granted licenses to patents, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the U.S. and Italy.

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property, particularly those relating to pharmaceutical and biotechnology products, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of patents that we have been granted licenses to or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. To date, we have not sought to enforce any issued patents in these foreign jurisdictions. Proceedings to enforce patent rights that we have been granted licenses to in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put patents that we have been granted licenses to at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and patent applications that we have been granted licenses to at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. The requirements for patentability may differ in certain countries, particularly developing countries. Certain countries in Europe and developing countries, including China and India, have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In those countries, we and our licensors may have limited remedies if patents are infringed or if we or our licensors are compelled to grant a license to a third party, which could materially diminish the value of those patents. This could limit our potential revenue opportunities. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce intellectual property rights that we have been granted licenses to around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license.

If we are unable to maintain effective proprietary rights for our product candidates, we may not be able to compete effectively in our markets.

In addition to the protection afforded by any issued patents to which we have been granted licenses and future patents that may be granted, our license agreement with OSR provides rights to access know-how, or trade secrets. We seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our data, trade secrets and intellectual property by maintaining physical security of our premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems, as well as by entering into confidentiality agreements. Agreements or security measures may be breached or could expire, and we may not have adequate remedies for any breach and/or expiration. In addition, our trade secrets may otherwise become known or be independently discovered by competitors.

We cannot provide any assurances that trade secrets and other confidential proprietary information will not be disclosed in violation of confidentiality agreements or that competitors will not otherwise gain access to trade secrets or independently develop substantially equivalent information and techniques. Also, misappropriation or unauthorized and unavoidable disclosure of trade secrets could impair our competitive position and may have a material adverse effect on our business. Additionally, if the steps taken to maintain trade secrets and intellectual property are deemed inadequate, we may have insufficient recourse against third parties for misappropriating any trade secret.

Third parties may initiate legal proceedings alleging that we are infringing their intellectual property rights, the outcome of which would be uncertain and could have a material adverse effect on the success of our business.

Our commercial success depends upon our ability to develop, manufacture, market and sell our platform technology without infringing the proprietary rights of third parties. There is considerable intellectual property litigation in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries. While no such judicial litigation has been brought against us and we have not been held by any court to have infringed a third party’s intellectual property rights, we cannot guarantee that our technology or use of our technology does not infringe third-party patents. It is also possible that we have failed to identify relevant third-party patents or applications. For example, applications filed before November 29, 2000, and certain applications filed after that date that will not be filed outside the U.S. remain confidential until patents issue. Patent applications in the U.S. and elsewhere are published approximately 18 months after the earliest filing, which is referred to as the priority date in cases where priority is claimed. Therefore, patent applications covering our technology could have been filed by others without our knowledge. Additionally, pending patent applications which have been published can, subject to certain limitations, be later amended in a manner that could cover our technology.

In March 2013, the U.S. transitioned to a ‘first to file’ system in which the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent. Third parties are allowed to submit prior art prior to the issuance of a patent by the USPTO and may become involved in post-grant review or derivation proceedings for applications filed on or after March 16, 2013, interference proceedings for applications filed before March 16, 2013, ex parte reexamination, or inter partes review challenging our patent rights or the patent rights of others. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation could reduce the scope of, or invalidate, our patent rights, which could adversely affect our competitive position with respect to third parties. We may become party to, or threatened with, future adversarial proceedings or litigation regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our technology, including inter partes review, interference, or derivation proceedings before the USPTO and similar bodies in other countries. Third parties may assert infringement claims against us based on existing intellectual property rights and intellectual property rights that may be granted in the future.

We are aware of issued patents in the U.S. that cover the lentiviral vectors used in the manufacture of our product candidates.

If we are found to infringe a third party’s intellectual property rights, we could be required to obtain a license from such third party to continue developing and marketing our technology. However, we may not be able to obtain any required license on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Any inability to secure licenses or alternative technology could result in delays in the introduction of our products or lead to prohibition of the manufacture or sale of products by us. Even if we were able to obtain a license, it could be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. We could be forced, including by court order, to cease commercializing the infringing technology. In addition, we could be found liable for monetary damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees if we are found to have willfully infringed a patent. A finding of infringement could prevent us from commercializing our technology or force us to cease some of our business operations, which could materially harm our business. Claims that we have misappropriated the confidential information or trade secrets of third parties could have a similar negative impact on our business.

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

Certain of our employees, consultants or advisors are currently, or were previously, employed at universities or other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Although we try to ensure that our employees, consultants, and advisors do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that these individuals or we have used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any such individual’s current or former employer. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail to defend any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management. Our licensors may face similar risks, which could have an adverse impact on intellectual property that is licensed to us.

In this respect, our key people Mr. Luigi Naldini and Mr. Bernhard Gentner are also employees of OSR –- San Raffaele Hospital, and have been appointed, according to a consultancy agreement, as directors of our scientific committee for the purpose of designing and developing the preclinic research and clinic experimentation program around cancers (Prof. Naldini) and mieloma (Dr. Gentner) gene therapy. The relevant consultancy agreements do not set forth any specific representation and warranty in our favor that their activities do not infringe any third party’s intellectual property rights (in particular, of OSR). In this respect, Dr. Naldini and Dr. Gentner have executed a statement whereby they have declared that their consultancy activities in our favor have been carried out by the same without infringing upon the intellectual property rights of OSR. OSR is not part of this statement and, therefore, OSR could in any case address claims against us with respect to an infringement of its intellectual property right by Dr. Naldini and Dr. Gentner in relation to their activity in our favor.

There may be claims challenging the inventorship of patents and other intellectual property that we have been granted licenses to.

There may be claims that former employees, collaborators, or other third parties have an interest in patents or other intellectual property that we have been granted licenses to as an inventor or co-inventor. For example, we may have inventorship disputes arise from conflicting obligations of consultants or others who are involved in developing our product candidates. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, there may be a loss of valuable intellectual property rights to us or our licensors, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees. In addition, we may receive less revenue from future products if any of our employees successfully claim compensation for their work in developing intellectual property, which in turn could have an impact on our future profitability.

Under applicable employment laws, we may not be able to prevent our employees or key consultants, after the termination of their relationship with us or –- with reference to key consultants –- during the same, to perform competitive activity in favor of other companies nor to enforce covenants not to compete and therefore may be unable to prevent our competitors from benefiting from the expertise of such employees or consultants. In addition, employees and consultants may be entitled to seek compensation for their inventions irrespective of their agreements with us.

To date, we have not entered into non-competition agreements with our current employees to prevent them, after the termination of their employment, to perform competitive activity in favor of other employers. Therefore, we cannot exclude the fact that such employers may benefit from the expertise of our current employees developed while working for us, after the termination of their employment. We sometimes enter into non-competition agreements with certain key consultants. These agreements prohibit key consultants, if they cease working for us, from competing directly with us or working for our competitors or clients for a limited period. We may be unable to enforce these agreements under the laws of the jurisdictions in which our consultants work and it may be difficult for us to restrict our competitors from benefitting from the expertise our former consultants developed while working for us. Under Italian law, a non-competition agreement could be invalidated if, for example, the geographic scope of the non-competition agreement is too broad, or, alternatively, such an agreement could be deemed by an Italian court to be an occupation ban. Such actions would make enforcing our non-competition agreements more challenging and could make it easier for our competitors to employ or benefit from the expertise of our key consultants. In addition, we cannot exclude that our current independent consultants may perform activities –during their relationship with us- which could result in competition / conflict with our activity (e.g., in case they perform their activity for the benefit of other employers or companies). Lastly, with reference to the key consultants with whom no non-competition agreement has been entered into, we cannot exclude that, after the termination of their relationship with us or during the same, other employers or companies may benefit from the expertise of such consultants developed while working for us.

In addition, under Italian law, in case of inventions developed by our employees, which were developed while performing their employment activities, but outside the performance of their contractual duties, the rights to the inventions belong to us but we are required to compensate the employees for the rights to their respective inventions. Regarding independent consultants, Italian law provides that, save for the case in which the inventive activity of the same has been set forth as the subject of the consulting agreement and compensated for this purpose, the rights to economically exploit the original contributions and inventions realized in the execution of the consulting agreement will belong to consultant.

To date, neither the employment agreements nor the consultancy agreements provide any specific compensation related to the inventive activity. Therefore, employees and independent consultants may ask for a fair compensation due to such inventions and, regarding independent consultants, the failure to pay a fair compensation could prevent us from obtaining rights on their inventions, and this could have a material adverse effect on our operations and ability to effectively compete.

Intellectual property rights do not necessarily address all potential threats.

The degree of future protection afforded by our intellectual property rights is uncertain because intellectual property rights have limitations and may not adequately protect our business or permit us to maintain our competitive advantage. For example:

Should any of these events occur, they could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. The patent positions of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally are highly uncertain, involve complex legal, technical, and factual questions and have in recent years been the subject of much litigation. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability, and commercial value of our patents, including those patent rights licensed to us by third parties, are highly uncertain.

Risks Related to Our Business Operations

As a company currently with substantial operations outside of the U.S., our business is subject to global economic conditions, macro events, political, regulatory, pandemic, and other risks associated with international operations and macro-economic trends.

As a company with substantial operations in Italy, our business is subject to risks associated with conducting business outside the U.S. Many of our suppliers and clinical trial relationships are located outside the U.S. The global economy, including credit and financial markets, has experienced extreme volatility and disruptions, including, among other things, severely diminished liquidity, and credit availability, declines in consumer confidence, declines in economic growth, supply chain shortages, increases in inflation rates, higher interest rates and uncertainty about economic stability. For example, during 2022 and 2023, the U.S. Federal Reserve raised interest rates multiple times in response to concerns about inflation. Higher interest rates, coupled with reduced government spending and volatility in financial markets may increase economic uncertainty and affect investor confidence. Similarly, the ongoing wars between Russia and Ukraine and Israel and Hamas has created extreme volatility in the global capital markets and is expected to have further global economic consequences, including disruptions of the global supply chain and energy markets.

Any such volatility and disruptions may adversely affect our business or the third parties on whom we rely. If the equity and credit markets deteriorate because of the political unrest or war, it may make any debt or equity financing more costly or more dilutive or more difficult to obtain in a timely manner or on favorable terms, if at all. Accordingly, our future results could be harmed by a variety of factors, including:

We manage our business through a small number of employees, key consultants, and third party contractors.

Our key people include our Chief Executive Officer and current Vice Chairman, Pierluigi Paracchi, who co-founded our company in 2014 along with Luigi Naldini, our Executive Scientific Board Chairman, and Bernhard Gentner, a member of our Executive Scientific Board. Our other key people include Carlo Russo, our Chief Medical Officer & Head of Development, Richard Slansky, our Chief Financial Officer, Barbara Regonini, our Finance Director and Stefania Mazzoleni, our Scientific Project Manager and Communications Officer. Our future growth and success depend on our ability to recruit, retain, manage, and motivate our employees and key consultants. The loss of the services of our Chief Executive Officer or any of our key personnel or the inability to hire or retain experienced management personnel could adversely affect our ability to execute our business plan and harm our operating results. Although we expect to enter into employment agreements with management, these agreements will likely be terminable at will with notice.

In addition, laws and regulations on executive compensation, including legislation in our home country, Italy, may restrict our ability to attract, motivate and retain the required level of qualified personnel.

Because of the specialized scientific and managerial nature of our business, we rely heavily on our ability to attract and retain qualified scientific and technical consultants. In particular, the loss of one or more of our key personnel could be detrimental to us if we cannot recruit suitable replacements in a timely manner. Recruiting and retaining other qualified employees, consultants, and advisors for our business, including scientific and technical personnel, will also be critical to our success. There is currently a shortage of skilled executives in our industry, which is likely to continue. As a result, competition for skilled personnel, including in gene therapy research and vector manufacturing, is intense and the turnover rate can be high. We may not be able to attract and retain personnel on acceptable terms given the competition among numerous pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for individuals with similar skill sets. In addition, failure to succeed in preclinical or clinical trials may make it more challenging to recruit and retain qualified personnel. The inability to recruit or the loss of the services of any executive, key employee, consultant, or advisor may impede the progress of our research, development, and commercialization objectives. We do not currently carry “key person” insurance on the lives of members of senior management. The competition for qualified personnel in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical fields is intense. Due to this intense competition, we may be unable to attract and retain qualified personnel necessary for the development of our business or to recruit suitable replacement personnel.

We rely on a single manufacturing facility, and if operations at that manufacturing facility are disrupted, we could experience delays in our clinical trials or we would need to expend additional time and capital to identify and onboard another manufacturing facility.

We face risks inherent in operating a single manufacturing facility, since any disruption, such as a fire, natural hazards or vandalism could significantly interrupt our manufacturing capability. We currently do not have alternative production plans in place or disaster-recovery facilities available. In case of a disruption, we will have to establish alternative manufacturing sources. This would require substantial capital on our part, which it may not be able to obtain on commercially acceptable terms or at all. Additionally, we would likely experience months or years of manufacturing delays as we build or locate replacement facilities and seek and obtain necessary regulatory approvals. If this occurs, we will be unable to satisfy manufacturing needs on a timely basis, if at all. Also, operating any new facilities may be more expensive than operating our current facility. Further, business interruption insurance may not adequately compensate us for any losses that may occur, and we would have to bear the additional cost of any disruption. For these reasons, a significant disruptive event at the manufacturing facility could have drastic consequences, including placing our financial stability at risk.

We will need to significantly increase the size of our organization, and we may experience difficulties in managing growth.

We currently have a very limited number of employees. If we are successful in executing our business strategy and to commercialize our products, if approved, we will need to substantially increase our operations, including expanding our employee base of managerial, operational and financial personnel. Any future growth will impose significant added responsibilities on members of management, including the need to identify, recruit, maintain and integrate additional employees. To that end, we must be able to:

Our employees, principal investigators, consultants, and commercial partners may engage in misconduct or other improper conduct or activities, including non-compliance with regulatory standards and requirements and insider trading.

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 the regulations of AIFA, the FDA, EMA, or of other foreign regulatory authorities, provide accurate information to AIFA, the FDA, EMA, and other foreign regulatory authorities, comply with healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations in the U.S. and other countries, report financial information or data accurately or disclose unauthorized activities to us. 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 may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Such misconduct could also involve the improper use of information obtained during clinical trials, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation. We have adopted a code of conduct applicable to all our employees, but 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 governmental 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 have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of significant fines or other sanctions.

We may be subject, directly, or indirectly, to federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws, false claims laws and health information privacy and security laws. If we are unable to comply, or have not fully complied, with such laws, we could face substantial penalties.

If we obtain AIFA, FDA, EMA or other regulatory authority approval for any of our product candidates and begin commercializing those products , our operations may be directly or indirectly through our customers, subject to various federal, state and/or international fraud and abuse laws, including, without limitation, the U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the U.S. federal False Claims Act and U.S. physician sunshine laws and regulations. These laws may impact, among other things, our proposed sales, marketing, and education programs. In addition, we may be subject to patient privacy regulation by both the U.S. federal government and the states and countries in which we conduct our business. The laws that may affect our ability to operate include:

The scope and enforcement of each of these laws is uncertain and subject to rapid change in the current environment of healthcare reform, especially considering the lack of applicable precedent and regulations. U.S. federal and state enforcement bodies have recently increased their scrutiny of interactions between healthcare companies and healthcare providers, which has led to several investigations, prosecutions, convictions and settlements in the healthcare industry. It is possible that U.S. and other governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices do not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other related governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, including, without limitation, damages, fines, imprisonment, disgorgement, exclusion from participation in government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, reputational harm, additional oversight and reporting obligations if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar settlement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. If any of the physicians or other healthcare providers or entities with whom we expect to do business is found to be not in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to similar actions, penalties, and sanctions. Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations, as well as responding to possible investigations by government authorities, can be time- and resource-consuming and can divert a company’s attention from the business.

Healthcare legislative and regulatory reform measures may have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Our industry is highly regulated and changes in law may adversely impact our business, operations, or financial results. The PPACA is a sweeping measure intended to, among other things, expand healthcare coverage within the U.S., primarily through the imposition of health insurance mandates on employers and individuals and expansion of the U.S. Medicaid program. Several provisions of the law may affect us and increase certain of our costs.

In addition, other legislative changes have been adopted since the PPACA was enacted. These changes include aggregate reductions in U.S. Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect on April 1, 2013 and, following passage of the U.S. Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, will remain in effect through 2027 unless additional U.S. Congressional action is taken. In January 2013, President Obama signed into law the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. These laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, which could have a material adverse effect on our customers and, accordingly, our financial operations.

We anticipate that the PPACA, as well as other U.S. healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and an additional downward pressure on the reimbursement our customers may receive for our products. Further, there have been, and there may continue to be, judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the PPACA. For example, the U.S. Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (the “TCJA”) includes a provision repealing, effective January 1, 2019, the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the PPACA on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year that is commonly referred to as the “individual mandate.” Additional legislative and regulatory changes to the PPACA, its implementing regulations and guidance and its policies, remain possible. However, it remains unclear how any new legislation or regulation might affect the prices we may obtain for any of our product candidates for which regulatory approval is obtained. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare and other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payers. 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.

In addition, the delivery of healthcare in the E.U., including the establishment and operation of health services and the pricing and reimbursement of medicines, is almost exclusively a matter for national, rather than E.U., law, and policy. National governments and health service providers have different priorities and approaches to the delivery of health care and the pricing and reimbursement of products in that context. In general, however, the healthcare budgetary constraints in most E.U. member states have resulted in restrictions on the pricing and reimbursement of medicines by relevant health service providers. Coupled with ever-increasing E.U. and national regulatory burdens on those wishing to develop and market products, this could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability to commercialize any products for which we obtain marketing approval.

We are currently unable to predict what additional legislation or regulation, if any, relating to the health care industry may be enacted in the future or what effect recently enacted federal legislation or any such additional legislation or regulation would have on our business. The pendency or approval of such proposals or reforms could result in a decrease in the price of our securities or limit our ability to raise capital or to enter into collaboration agreements for the further development and potential commercialization of our products.

The use of any of our product candidates could result in product liability or similar claims that could be expensive, damage our reputation and harm our business.

Our business exposes us to an inherent risk of potential product liability or similar claims. Mainly in the U.S., the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries have historically been litigious, and we face financial exposure to product liability or similar claims if the use of any of our products were to cause or contribute to injury or death. There is also the possibility that defects in the design or manufacture of any of our products might necessitate a product recall. Although we plan to maintain product liability insurance, the coverage limits of these policies may not be adequate to cover future claims. In the future, we may be unable to maintain product liability insurance on acceptable terms or at reasonable costs and such insurance may not provide us with adequate coverage against potential liabilities. A product liability claim, regardless of merit or ultimate outcome, or any product recall could result in substantial costs to us, damage to our reputation, customer dissatisfaction and frustration and a substantial diversion of management attention. A successful claim brought against us more than, or outside of, our insurance coverage, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Our internal information technology systems, or those of our third party vendors, collaborators, or other contractors or consultants, may fail or suffer cyber security breaches or other unauthorized or improper access, which could result in a significant disruption of our product development programs, give rise to significant liability, subject us to costly and protracted litigation, cause significant reputational harm, and impact our ability to operate our business effectively.

We are increasingly dependent upon information technology systems, infrastructure, and data to operate our business. In the ordinary course of business, we collect, store, and transmit confidential information (including but not limited to intellectual property, proprietary business information, and personal information). It is critical that we do so in a secure manner to maintain the confidentiality and integrity of such information. We also have outsourced elements of our operations to third parties, and as a result we manage a few third party vendors and other contractors and consultants who have access to our confidential information.

Our internal information technology systems and those of our current and any future third party vendors, collaborators and other contractors or consultants may be vulnerable to a variety of disruptive elements, including data breaches, cyber-attacks by malicious third parties (including the deployment of computer viruses, harmful malware, ransomware, denial-of-service attacks, social engineering, and other means to affect service reliability and threaten the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of information), unauthorized access, natural disasters, terrorism, war, telecommunication and electrical failures and persons with access to systems inside our organization. In particular, the risk of a security breach or disruption, through cyber-attacks or cyber intrusion, including by computer hackers and cyber terrorists, has generally increased as the number, intensity, and sophistication of attempted attacks and intrusions from around the world have increased. We may not be able to anticipate all types of security threats, and we may not be able to implement preventive measures effective against all such security threats. Because the techniques used by cyber criminals change frequently, may not be recognized until launched, and can originate from a wide variety of sources, including outside groups such as external service providers, organized crime affiliates or terrorist organizations, we and our partners may be unable to anticipate these techniques or implement adequate preventative measures. Further, we do not have any control over the operations of the facilities or technology of third parties that collect, process and store personal data on our behalf.

While we have not experienced any significant system failure, accident, or security breach to date, if such an event were to occur and cause interruptions in our operations or a loss of, or damage to, our data or applications, or those of our third party vendors and other collaborators, contractors and consultants, it could result in a disruption of our development programs and our business operations, whether due to a loss of our trade secrets or other confidential, personal or proprietary information, significant delays or setbacks in our research, or other similar disruptions. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed or future clinical trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. To the extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in a loss of, or damage to, our data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential, personal, or proprietary information, we could incur significant liability, our competitive position could be harmed, our reputation could be damaged, and the further development and commercialization of our product candidates could be delayed.

Unauthorized disclosure of sensitive or confidential data, including personal information, whether through a breach of computer systems, systems failure, employee negligence, fraud or misappropriation, or otherwise, or unauthorized access to or through our information systems and networks, whether by our employees or third parties, could result in negative publicity, damage to our reputation and/or compel us to comply with federal and/or state breach notification laws and foreign law equivalents, subject us to mandatory corrective action, and otherwise subject us to liability under laws and regulations that protect the privacy and security of personal information. The costs related to significant security breaches or disruptions could be material. If the information technology systems of our third-party vendors and other collaborators, contractors and consultants become subject to disruptions or security breaches, we may be exposed to material liability and have insufficient recourse against such third parties and we may have to expend significant resources to mitigate the impact of such an event, and to develop and implement protections to prevent future events of this nature from occurring. Any of the foregoing could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects.

Any lingering impact from the COVID-19 pandemic could disrupt and cause harm to our business, operating results, or financial condition.

The duration and extent of any lingering impact from the COVID-19 pandemic on our business will continue to depend on future developments that cannot be accurately forecasted at this time, such as the emergence of new COVID-19 variants, the transmission rate and geographic spread of the disease, the extent and effectiveness of any applicable containment actions, the widespread use of effective vaccines and the severity of breakthrough cases, and the impact of these and other factors on our employees, patients, partners, contract manufacturers, suppliers and other third-party providers. If we are not able to respond to and manage the impact of such events effectively and if the macroeconomic conditions of the general economy or the industry in which we operate do not improve, or worsen from present levels, our business, operating results, financial condition, and cash flows could be adversely affected.

We or the third parties upon whom we depend, may be adversely affected by earthquakes or other natural disasters and our business continuity and disaster recovery plans may not adequately protect us from a serious disaster.

Earthquakes or other natural disasters could severely disrupt our operations, and have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition, and prospects. If a natural disaster, power outage or other event occurred that prevented us from using all or a significant portion of our headquarters, that damaged critical infrastructure, such as the manufacturing facilities of our third-party contract manufacturers, or that otherwise disrupted operations, it may be difficult or, in certain cases, impossible for us to continue our business for a substantial period. The disaster recovery and business continuity plans that we have in place currently are limited and are unlikely to prove adequate in the event of a serious disaster or similar event. We may incur substantial expenses because of the limited nature of our disaster recovery and business continuity plans, which, particularly when taken together with our lack of earthquake insurance, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Unsuccessful compliance with certain European privacy regulations could have an adverse effect on our business and reputation.

The collection and use of personal health data in the E.U. is governed, as of May 2018, by the General Data Protection Regulation 2016/679 (the “GDPR”) as implemented by European Data Protection Board (the “EDPB”) guidelines and E.U. Member States national legislations. General E.U. data protection rules impose several requirements relating to the consent of the individuals to whom the personal data relates, the information provided to the individuals, notification of data processing obligations to the competent national data protection authorities and the security and confidentiality of the personal data. The GDPR also extends the geographical scope of E.U. data protection law to non-E.U. entities under certain conditions, tightens existing E.U. data protection principles and creates new obligations for companies and new rights for individuals. Failure to comply with the requirements of the GDPR, the EDPB guidelines and the related national data protection laws of the E.U. Member States may result in fines and other administrative penalties. The GDPR introduces new data protection requirements in the E.U. and substantial fines for breaches of the data protection rules, including violation of articles 44 to 49 GDPR related to transfer of personal data to a recipient in a non-E.U. country. The GDPR regulations impose additional responsibility and liability in relation to personal data that we process, and we intend to put in place additional mechanisms ensuring compliance with these and/or new data protection rules. In addition, other jurisdictions, including Italy, have implemented regulations like GDPR. Regarding Italian legislation, the national Privacy and Data Protection Code has been amended according to GDPR provisions (Legislative Decree n. 196/2003 as amended and updated by Legislative Decree n. 101/2018) and imposes additional fines and administrative penalties in relation to the processing of health data and processing of data for scientific research purposes. Moreover, European data protection background is constantly changing under the drive of the EDPB on the correct interpretation and application of GDPR and the ruling activity of the Court of Justice of the E.U. (see, for instance, the recent CJEU case C-3111/18, also known as Schremes II which invalidated the E.U.-U.S. Privacy Shield Framework for transfer of data to U.S.).

The Company is compliant with most recent legislative changes in European data protection rules, adopting Data Processing Agreements containing Standard Contractual Clauses with all partners based in the U.S. and (for the transition period until June 2021) in the United Kingdom. However, changes to these European privacy regulations (and similar regulations in other jurisdictions) and unsuccessful compliance may be onerous and adversely affect our business, financial condition, prospects, results of operations and reputation.