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

For the transition period from to

OR

Date of event requiring this shell company report

Commission file number 001-39487

Silence Therapeutics plc

(EXACT NAME OF REGISTRANT AS SPECIFIED IN ITS CHARTER)

Not Applicable

(Translation of Registrant’s Name into English)

United Kingdom

(Jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)

72 Hammersmith Road

London W14 8TH

United Kingdom

(Address of principal executive offices)

Craig Tooman

Chief Executive Officer

Silence Therapeutics plc

72 Hammersmith Road

London W14 8TH

United Kingdom

Tel: +44 20 3457 6900

(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

Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act: None

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.

Ordinary shares, nominal value £0.05 per share: 118,846,966 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

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.

Large accelerated filer ☐ Accelerated filer ☒ Non-accelerated filer ☐ Emerging growth company ☒

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. ☐

† The term “new or revised financial accounting standard” refers to any update issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board to its Accounting Standards Codification after April 5, 2012.

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

TABLE OF CONTENTS

GENERAL INFORMATION

Unless otherwise indicated or the context otherwise requires, all references in this report to the terms “Silence,” “Silence Therapeutics,” “Silence Therapeutics plc,” “the company,” “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Silence Therapeutics plc together with its subsidiaries. In this Annual Report, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is referred to as the “SEC”, the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, is referred to as the “Securities Act” and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, is referred to as the “Exchange Act.”

PRESENTATION OF FINANCIAL AND OTHER DATA

We maintain our books and records in pounds sterling and report under International Financial Reporting Standards, or IFRS, as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board, or IASB. None of the financial statements included in this report were prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States. All references in this report to “$” are to U.S. dollars and all references to “£” are to pounds sterling. Except with respect to U.S. dollar amounts presented as contractual terms or otherwise indicated, all amounts presented in this report in U.S. dollars have been translated from pounds sterling solely for convenience at an assumed exchange rate of $1.27 per £1.00, based on the noon buying rate of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York on December 31, 2023. We make no representation that any pounds sterling or U.S. dollar amounts referred to in this Annual Report could have been, or could be, converted into U.S. dollars or pounds sterling, as the case may be, at any particular rate, or at all. These translations should not be considered representations that any such amounts have been, could have been or could be converted from pounds sterling into U.S. dollars at that or any other exchange rate as of that or any other date.

We have made rounding adjustments to some of the figures included in this Annual Report. Accordingly, numerical figures shown as totals in some tables may not be an arithmetic aggregation of the figures that preceded them. Additionally, numerical figures under £100,000 have been rounded to the nearest thousand in this Annual Report.

All references to “shares” or “ordinary shares” in this Annual Report refer to ordinary shares of Silence Therapeutics plc with a nominal value of £0.05 per share. All references to ADSs refer to American Depositary Shares, each representing three ordinary shares of Silence Therapeutics plc, which are denominated in U.S. dollars and listed on Nasdaq.

TRADEMARKS, TRADENAMES AND SERVICE MARKS

This Annual Report includes trademarks, tradenames and service marks, certain of which belong to us and others that are the property of other organizations. Solely for convenience, trademarks, tradenames and service marks referred to in this report appear without the ®, ™ and SM symbols, but the absence of those symbols is not intended to indicate, in any way, that we will not assert our rights or that the applicable owner will not assert its rights to these trademarks, tradenames and service marks to the fullest extent under applicable law. We do not intend our use or display of other parties’ trademarks, trade names or service marks to imply, and such use or display should not be construed to imply, a relationship with, or endrorsement or sponsorship of us by, these other parties.

CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report contains forward-looking statements that involve substantial risks and uncertainties. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by the words “may,” “might,” “will,” “could,” “would,” “should,” “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “objective,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “potential,” “continue” and “ongoing,” or the negative of these terms, or other comparable terminology intended to identify statements about the future. These statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other important factors that may cause our actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements to be materially different from the information expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements and opinions contained in this Annual Report are based upon information available to us as of the date of this Annual Report and, while we believe such information forms a reasonable basis for such statements, such information may be limited or incomplete, and our statements should not be read to indicate that we have conducted an exhaustive inquiry into, or review of, all potentially available relevant information. Forward-looking statements include statements about:

You should refer to the section of this Annual Report titled “Risk Factors” for a discussion of important factors that may cause our actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by our forward-looking statements. As a result of these factors, we cannot assure you that the forward-looking statements in this Annual Report will prove to be accurate. Furthermore, if our forward-looking statements prove to be inaccurate, the inaccuracy may be material. In light of the significant uncertainties in these forward-looking statements, you should not regard these

statements as a representation or warranty by us or any other person that we will achieve our objectives and plans in any specified time frame, or at all. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made, and we do not undertake any obligation to update them in light of new information or future developments or to release publicly any revisions to these statements in order to reflect later events or circumstances or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.

You should read this Annual Report and the documents that we reference in this Annual Report and have filed as exhibits to the Annual Report completely and with the understanding that our actual future results may be materially different from what we expect. We qualify all of our forward-looking statements by these cautionary statements.

PART I

ITEM 1: IDENTITY OF DIRECTORS, SENIOR MANAGEMENT AND ADVISORS

Not applicable.

ITEM 2: OFFER STATISTICS AND EXPECTED TIMETABLE

Not applicable.

ITEM 3: KEY INFORMATION

A. [Reserved.]

B. Capitalization and Indebtedness.

Not applicable.

C. Reasons for the Offer and Use of Proceeds.

Not applicable.

D. Risk Factors.

Investing in American Depositary Shares representing our ordinary shares, or ADSs, involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the following risk factors and all other information contained in this Annual Report, including our consolidated financial statements and the related notes, before investing in the ADSs. The risks and uncertainties described below are those significant risk factors, currently known and specific to us, that we believe are relevant to an investment in the ADSs. If any of these risks materialize, our business, results of operations or financial condition could suffer, the price of the ADSs could decline and you could lose part or all of your investment. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to us or that we now deem immaterial may also harm us and adversely affect your investment in the ADSs.

Risks Factor Summary

Our business is subject to a number of risks of which you should be aware before making an investment decision. You should carefully consider all of the information set forth in this report and, in particular, should evaluate the specific factors set forth below in this section titled “Risk Factors” before deciding whether to invest in our ADSs. Among these important risks are, but not limited to, the following:

Risks Related to Our Financial Condition and Need for Additional Capital

Risks Related to the Discovery, Development, Regulatory Approval and Potential Commercialization of Our Product Candidates

Risks Related to Our Business Operations and Compliance with Government Regulations

Risks Related to our Intellectual Property

Risks Related to Our ADSs

Implications of Being an Emerging Growth Company and a Foreign Private Issuer

Emerging Growth Company

We are an “emerging growth company” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012, or the JOBS Act. As such, we may take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other publicly traded entities that are not emerging growth companies. These exemptions include:

We will remain an emerging growth company until the earliest of: (1) the last day of the first fiscal year in which our annual gross revenues exceed $1.235 billion; (2) the last day of 2025; (3) the date that we become a “large accelerated filer” as defined in Rule 12b-2 under the Exchange Act, which would occur on the last day of any fiscal year that the aggregate worldwide market value of our common equity held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of the last business day of our most recently completed second fiscal quarter; or (4) the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt securities during any three-year period.

Foreign Private Issuer

We report under the Exchange Act as a non-U.S. company with foreign private issuer status. Even after we no longer qualify as an emerging growth company, as long as we qualify as a foreign private issuer under the Exchange Act, we will be exempt from certain provisions of the Exchange Act that are applicable to U.S. domestic public companies, including:

Foreign private issuers are also exempt from certain more stringent executive compensation disclosure rules. Thus, even if we no longer qualify as an emerging growth company, but remain a foreign private issuer, we will continue to be exempt from the more stringent compensation disclosures required of companies that are neither an emerging growth company nor a foreign private issuer.

Risks Related to Our Financial Condition and Need for Additional Capital

We have a history of net losses and we anticipate that we will continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future.

We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company. As of the date hereof, our operations have been primarily limited to developing our siRNA product platform, undertaking basic research around siRNA targets, conducting preclinical and clinical studies and out-licensing some of our intellectual property rights. We have not yet obtained marketing approval for any product candidates and may not for the foreseeable future, if ever. Consequently, any predictions about our future success or viability, or any evaluation of our business and prospects, may not be accurate.

We have incurred net losses in each year since our inception. Our net losses were £43.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2023, £40.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2022, and £39.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2021. As of December 31, 2023, we had an accumulated loss of £304.6 million. Our losses have resulted primarily from costs related to our research and development programs, including our preclinical and clinical development activities.

We expect to continue incurring significant operating losses for the foreseeable future, although these losses may fluctuate significantly between periods. We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially as we continue the research, preclinical and clinical development of our product candidates, both independently and under our collaboration agreements with third parties. We would also incur additional expenses in connection with seeking marketing approvals for any product candidates that successfully complete clinical trials, if any, and establishing a sales, marketing and distribution infrastructure to commercialize any products for which we may obtain marketing approval. We will also need to maintain, expand and protect our intellectual property portfolio, hire additional personnel, and create additional infrastructure to support our operations and our product development efforts. We expect that all of these additional expenses will cause our total expenses to substantially exceed our revenue over the near term, resulting in continuing operating losses and increasing accumulated deficits.

We have never generated any revenue from product sales and may never be profitable.

Our ability to generate revenue and achieve profitability depends on our ability, alone or with collaboration partners, to successfully complete the development of, obtain the necessary regulatory approvals for and commercialize our product candidates. We do not anticipate generating revenues from sales of products for the foreseeable future, if ever. Our ability to generate future revenues from product sales will depend heavily on our success in:

Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with pharmaceutical product development, we are unable to predict the timing or amount of increased expenses and when we will be able to achieve or maintain profitability, if ever. In addition, our expenses could increase if we were required by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, the European Medicines Agency, or EMA, the U.K. Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, or MHRA, or other regulatory authorities to perform studies and trials in addition to those that we currently anticipate.

Even if one or more of our product candidates is approved for commercial sale, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercializing any approved product on our own. Even if we were able to generate revenues from the sale of any approved products, we may not become profitable and may need to obtain additional funding to continue operations.

We will require additional financial resources to continue the ongoing development of our product candidates and pursue our business objectives. If we are unable to obtain these additional resources when needed or on acceptable terms, we may be forced to delay or discontinue our planned operations, including clinical testing of our product candidates.

We have used substantial funds to develop our RNA interference, or RNAi, technologies and will require substantial funds to conduct further research and development, including preclinical testing and clinical trials of our product candidates, and to manufacture, market and sell any of our products that may be approved for commercial sale. Because the length of time, and the activities associated with, the successful development of our product candidates may be greater than we anticipate, we are unable to estimate the actual funds we will require to develop and commercialize them.

Developing pharmaceutical products, including conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials, is expensive. We expect our research and development expenses and net losses to substantially increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we advance our product candidates towards or through clinical trials. We will need additional capital to fund our operations, including clinical trials for product candidates other than those which are funded by our collaboration partners, and such funding may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. In any event, we will require additional capital to obtain regulatory approval for, and to commercialize, future product candidates.

For the foreseeable future, we expect to rely primarily on additional non-dilutive strategic collaboration arrangements, as well as equity or debt financings, to fund our operations. Raising additional capital through the sale of securities could cause significant dilution to our shareholders. 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. Our ability to raise additional funds will depend, in part, on the success of our preclinical studies and clinical trials and other product development activities, regulatory events, our ability to identify and enter into licensing or other strategic arrangements, and other events or conditions that may affect our value or prospects, as well as factors related to financial, economic and market conditions, many of which are beyond our control. There

can be no assurances that sufficient funds will be available to us when required or on acceptable terms, if at all. If we are unable to raise additional capital when required or on acceptable terms, we may be required to:

Any of these events would have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and prospects and could significantly impair the value of your investment in our ADSs.

We have funded our operations to date through upfront payments and milestones from collaboration agreements, equity offerings and proceeds from private placements, as well as management of expenses and other financing options. During 2023, we received a $10.0 million (approximately £7.9 million) milestone payment from the AstraZeneca collaboration and $4 million (approximately £3.2 million) in milestone payments from the Hansoh collaboration. We also raised proceeds of approximately $32.2 million (approximately £25.5 million), before deducting £1.0 million in placement agent fees and other expenses, from sales of ADSs under our Open Market Sale Agreement, or the Sales Agreement, with Jefferies LLC, as sales agent. As of December 31, 2023, we had cash and cash equivalents of £54.0 million ($68.8 million).
 

In January 2024, we raised an additional $20 million of net proceeds before deducting $0.6 million in placement agent fees and other expenses from sales of ADSs under our Sales Agreement.

On February 5, 2024, we announced a private placement of 5,714,286 ADSs at a price of US $21.00 per ADS with new and existing institutional and accredited investors, for aggregate gross proceeds of $120.0 million (approximately £94.5 million) before deducting approximately £5.7 million in placement agent fees and other expenses.

There is no assurance that we will be successful in obtaining sufficient funding on terms acceptable to us, or if at all. We may receive future milestone payments of up to $12 million from existing collaboration agreements in the next 12 months, which we believe will extend our ability to fund our operations into 2026. However, these future milestone payments are dependent on achievement of certain development or regulatory objectives that may not occur. The inability to obtain future funding could impact our financial condition and ability to pursue our business strategies, including being required to delay, reduce or eliminate some of our research and development programs, or being unable to continue operations or unable to continue as a going concern.

Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our holders, including holders of our ADSs, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish rights to our technologies or product candidates.

We expect that additional capital will be needed in the future to continue our planned operations, including expanded research and development activities and potential commercialization efforts. Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial product revenues, we expect to finance our cash needs through any or a combination of strategic collaboration arrangements, equity or debt financings, and research grants and tax credits.

If we raise additional funds through collaborations, strategic alliances or marketing, distribution or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may be required to relinquish valuable rights to our technologies, future revenue streams, research programs or product candidates or to grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us. In

addition, we could also be required to seek funds through arrangements with collaborators or others at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable.

To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, including in any at-the-market offering through the Sales Agreement, your ownership interest will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect your rights as a shareholder. Debt financing and preferred equity financing, if available, could result in fixed payment obligations, and we may be required to accept terms that restrict our ability to incur additional indebtedness, force us to maintain specified liquidity or other ratios or restrict our ability to pay dividends or make acquisitions.

If we are unable to raise additional funds through equity or debt financings when needed, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development or future commercialization efforts or grant rights to a third party to develop and market product candidates that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves. If we raise funds through research grants or take advantage of research and development tax credits, we may be subject to certain requirements, which may limit our ability to use the funds or require us to share information from our research and development. Raising additional capital through any of these or other means could adversely affect our business and the holdings or rights of our shareholders, and may cause the market price of our ADSs to decline.

Risks Related to the Discovery, Development, Regulatory Approval and Potential Commercialization of Our Product Candidates

The approach we are taking to discover and develop drugs is novel and may never lead to marketable products.

We have concentrated our therapeutic product research and development efforts on siRNA technology, and our future success depends on the successful development of this technology and products based on our siRNA product platform.

The scientific discoveries that form the basis for our efforts to discover and develop product candidates based on siRNA technology are relatively new. The scientific evidence to support the feasibility of developing product candidates based on these discoveries is both preliminary and limited. If we do not successfully develop and commercialize product candidates based upon our technological approach, we may not become profitable and the value of our ordinary shares may decline.

Further, our focus solely on siRNA technology for developing drugs as opposed to multiple, more proven technologies for drug development increases the risks associated with the ownership of our ordinary shares. If we are not successful in developing any product candidates using siRNA technology, we may be required to change the scope and direction of our product development activities. In that case, we may not be able to identify and successfully implement an alternative product development strategy.

We may not be successful in our efforts to identify or discover potential product candidates.

The success of our business depends primarily upon our ability to identify, develop and commercialize siRNA therapeutics. Our clinical and pre-clinical research programs may show initial promise in identifying potential product candidates, yet fail to yield product candidates for clinical development for a number of reasons, including:

If any of these events occur, we may be forced to abandon our development efforts for a program or programs, which would have a material adverse effect on our business and could potentially cause us to cease operations. Research programs to identify new product candidates require substantial technical, financial and human resources. We may focus our efforts and resources on potential programs or product candidates that ultimately prove to be unsuccessful.

We may not be successful in our efforts to increase our pipeline, including by pursuing additional indications for our current product candidates, identifying additional indications for our proprietary platform technology or in-licensing or acquiring additional product candidates for other indications.

We may not be able to develop or identify product candidates that are safe, tolerable and effective. Even if we are successful in continuing to build our pipeline, the potential product candidates that we identify, in-license or acquire may not be suitable for clinical development, including as a result of being shown to have harmful side effects or other characteristics that indicate that they are unlikely to be products that will receive marketing approval and achieve market acceptance.

Preclinical studies and clinical trials of our product candidates may not be successful. If we are unable to generate successful results from these studies and trials, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business may be materially harmed.

We have invested a significant portion of our efforts and financial resources in the identification and development of siRNA-based product candidates. Our ability to generate product revenues, which we do not expect will occur for many years, if ever, will depend heavily on the successful development and eventual commercialization of our product candidates.

The success of our product candidates will depend on several factors, including, inter alia, the following:

If we do not achieve one or more of these factors in a timely manner or at all, we could experience significant delays or an inability to successfully complete the development of, or commercialize, our product candidates, which would materially harm our business.

From time to time, we may publicly disclose preliminary or “topline” data from our clinical trials, which is based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following a more comprehensive review of the data related to the particular study or clinical trial. As a result, the “topline” or preliminary results that we report may differ from future results of the same studies, or different

conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. “Topline” data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available.

We may also disclose interim data from our clinical trials. Interim data from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available or as patients from our clinical trials continue other treatments for their disease. Adverse differences between preliminary or interim data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects. Further, disclosure of interim data by us or by our competitors could result in volatility in the price of our Ordinary Shares.

If the interim, “topline,” or preliminary data that we report differ from actual results, or if others, including regulatory authorities, disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain approval for, and commercialize, our product candidates may be harmed, which could significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

If clinical trials of our product candidates fail to commence or, once commenced fail to demonstrate safety and efficacy to the satisfaction of regulatory authorities, or do not otherwise produce positive results, we may incur additional costs or experience delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete, the development and commercialization of our product candidates.

In clinical development, the risk of failure for product candidates is high. It is impossible to predict when or if any of our product candidates will prove effective or safe in humans or will receive regulatory approval. We are the sponsor of Investigational Medicinal Product Dossiers in multiple jurisdictions and must achieve and maintain compliance with the requirements of various regulatory authorities. Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of product candidates, we or a strategic collaborator must conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the product candidates in humans. As of the date hereof, we have two proprietary product candidates in clinical development, and our other product candidates are preclinical. Clinical trials are expensive, difficult to design and implement, can take many years to complete and are uncertain as to outcome. A failure of one or more clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing. The outcome of early clinical trials may not be predictive of the success of later clinical trials, and interim results of a clinical trial do not necessarily predict final results. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or adverse safety profiles, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials. Moreover, clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing approval for their products.

Events which may result in a delay or unsuccessful completion of clinical development include, among other things:

If we or our current or future strategic collaborators are required to conduct additional clinical trials or other testing of any product candidates beyond those that are currently contemplated, are unable to successfully complete clinical trials of any such product candidates or other testing, or if the results of these trials or tests are not positive or are only moderately positive, or if there are safety concerns, we and they may:

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. In addition, our product development costs will also increase if we experience delays in testing or marketing approvals. We do not know whether any clinical trials will begin as planned, will need to be restructured or will be completed on schedule, or at all. Significant clinical trial 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 would impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and may harm our business and results of operations. Any inability to successfully complete clinical development, whether independently or with a strategic collaborator, could result in additional costs to us or impair our ability to generate revenues from product sales, regulatory and commercialization milestone payments and royalties.

Conducting successful clinical trials requires the enrollment of large numbers of patients, and suitable patients may be difficult to identify and recruit.

Patient enrollment in clinical trials and completion of patient participation and follow-up depends on many factors, including the size of the patient population; the nature of the trial protocol; the attractiveness of, or the discomforts and risks associated with, the treatments received by enrolled subjects; the availability of appropriate clinical trial investigators; support staff; the number of ongoing clinical trials in the same indication that compete for the same patients; proximity of patients to clinical sites and ability to comply with the eligibility and exclusion criteria for participation in the clinical trial and patient compliance; the impact of global health crises. For example, patients may be discouraged from enrolling in our clinical trials if the trial protocol requires them to undergo extensive post-treatment procedures or follow-up to assess the safety and effectiveness of our products or if they determine that the treatments received under the trial protocols are not attractive or involve unacceptable risks or discomforts. Patients may also not participate in our clinical trials if they choose to participate in contemporaneous clinical trials of competitive products.

Delays in subject enrollment may result in increased costs or may affect the timing or outcome of the planned clinical trials, which could prevent completion of these trials and adversely affect our ability to advance the development of our product candidates.

If we are unable to maintain any of our existing collaborations, or if these arrangements are not successful, or we are unable to enter into future licenses, our business could be adversely affected.

We have entered into collaborations with other parties, including pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies like Hansoh Pharmaceutical Group Company Limited, or Hansoh, Mallinckrodt plc, or Mallinckrodt, and AstraZeneca PLC, or AstraZeneca, to develop products based on our RNAi technology, and such collaborations and licensing arrangements currently represent a significant portion of our product candidate pipeline. Certain of our collaborations have provided us with important funding for some of our development programs and we expect to receive additional funding under collaborations in the future if certain milestones are achieved although not all of our collaborations may result in funding to us, and certain collaborations, licenses and agreements may result in increased expenditures by us.

Our dependence on collaborators for capabilities and funding means that our business could be adversely affected if any collaborator materially amends or terminates its collaboration agreement with us or fails to perform its obligations under that agreement. Our current or future collaborations, if any, may not be scientifically or commercially successful. Disputes may arise in the future with respect to the ownership of rights to technology or products developed with collaborators, which could have an adverse effect on our ability to develop and commercialize any affected product candidate. Our current collaborations allow, and we expect that any future collaborations will allow, either party to terminate the collaboration for a material breach by the other party. In addition, our collaborators may have additional termination rights for convenience with respect to the collaboration or a particular program under the collaboration, under certain circumstances. For example, our collaboration agreements with Mallinckrodt, AstraZeneca and Hansoh may each be terminated by the respective collaborator at any time upon prior written notice to us. If we were to lose a collaborator, we may have to attract a new collaborator or develop expanded research and development, sales, distribution and marketing capabilities internally, which would require us to invest significant amounts of financial and management resources.

We are actively exploring licenses and other strategic collaborations with additional pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for development and potential commercialization of therapeutic products. However, we face significant competition in seeking appropriate collaborators. If we are unable to reach agreements with suitable collaborators on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or at all, we may have to curtail the development of a product candidate, reduce or delay our development programs, delay potential commercialization, or increase our expenditures and undertake development or commercialization activities at our own expense. If we elect to fund and undertake development or commercialization activities on our own, we may need to obtain additional expertise and additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all.

We rely on third parties to conduct some aspects of our manufacturing, research and development activities, and those third parties may not perform satisfactorily, including failing to meet deadlines for the completion of research or clinical testing, or may terminate our agreements.

We do not expect to independently conduct all aspects of our manufacturing and drug discovery activities, research or preclinical and clinical studies of product candidates. We currently rely, and expect to continue relying, on third parties to conduct some aspects of our drug development studies and chemical syntheses. Any of these third parties may terminate their engagements with us at any time. If we need to enter into alternative arrangements, it would delay our product development activities. Our reliance on these third parties for research and development activities will reduce our control over these activities but will not relieve us of our responsibilities. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines or conduct our pre-clinical and clinical studies in accordance with regulatory requirements or our stated study plans and protocols, we will not be able to complete, or may be delayed in completing, the necessary preclinical studies to enable us to progress viable product candidates for investigational new drug, or IND, submissions or comparable foreign submissions and will not be able to, or may be delayed in our efforts to, advance our clinical trials which would prevent us from successfully developing and commercializing our product candidates.

Although our research and development services can only be performed by us or at our discretion, we rely on third party clinical investigators, CROs, clinical data management organizations, medical institutions and consultants to design, conduct, supervise and monitor preclinical studies and clinical trials in relation to our product candidates. Because we rely on third parties and do not have the ability to conduct clinical trials independently, we have less control over the timing, quality and other aspects of clinical trials than we would if we conducted them on our own. These investigators, CROs and consultants are not our employees and we have limited control over the amount of time and resources that they dedicate to our programs. These third parties may have contractual relationships with other entities, some of which may be our competitors, which may draw time and resources away from our programs. If we cannot contract with acceptable third parties on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, or if these third parties do not carry out their contractual duties, satisfy legal and regulatory requirements for the conduct of clinical trials or meet expected deadlines, our clinical development program could be delayed or otherwise adversely affected. In all events, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the general investigational plan and protocols for the trial. The FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities require us to comply with GCP, other applicable regulatory requirements and the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki for conducting, recording and reporting the results of clinical trials to assure that data and reported results are credible, accurate and complete and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of trial participants are protected. We rely, for example, on third parties for aspects of quality control which are especially important in monitoring compliance with GCP requirements and avoiding any investigator fraud or misconduct in clinical research, such as practices including adherence to an investigational plan; accurate recordkeeping; drug accountability; obtaining completed informed consent forms; timely reporting of any adverse drug reactions; notifying appropriate investigational review boards, or IRBs, and ethics committees of progress reports and any significant changes; and obtaining documented IRB approvals or positive ethics committee opinions. Our reliance on third parties that we do not control does not relieve us of these responsibilities and requirements. The third parties with which we contract might not be diligent, careful or timely in conducting our clinical trials, as a result of which we could experience one or more lapses in quality controls or other aspects of clinical trial management, and the clinical trials could be delayed or unsuccessful. Any such event could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We rely on third-party manufacturers to produce our preclinical, clinical product candidates and certain starting material components, and we intend to rely on third parties to produce future clinical supplies of product candidates that we advance into clinical trials and commercial supplies of any approved product candidates.

Reliance on third-party manufacturers entails risks, including risks that we would not be subject to if we manufactured the product candidates ourselves, including:

We face risks inherent in relying on contract manufacturing organizations, or CMOs, as any disruption, such as a fire, natural hazards, pandemic, epidemic, war or outbreak of an infectious disease at a CMO could significantly interrupt our manufacturing capability. We, or our contract manufacturers, any future collaborators and their contract manufacturers could be subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA, competent authorities of EU Member States or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, to monitor and ensure compliance with cGMP. Despite our efforts to audit and verify regulatory compliance, one or more of our third-party manufacturing vendors may be found on regulatory inspection by the FDA, competent authorities of EU Member States or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities to be noncompliant with cGMP regulations. Our failure, or the failure of our third-party manufacturers, to comply with applicable regulations could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including shutdown of the third-party vendor or invalidation of drug product lots or processes, fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension, variation or withdrawal of approvals, license revocation, seizures or recalls of product candidates or drugs, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly and adversely affect supplies of our products, if approved, and significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. If necessary to avoid future disruption, we may have to establish alternative manufacturing sources. This would require substantial capital on our part, which we may not be able to obtain on commercially acceptable terms or at all. Additionally, we may experience 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 the then existing 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 affecting the manufacturing facility could have drastic consequences, including placing our financial stability at risk.

Even if we complete the necessary preclinical studies and clinical trials, we cannot predict whether or when we will obtain regulatory approval to commercialize a product candidate and we cannot, therefore, predict the timing of any revenue from a future product.

Neither we nor any strategic collaborator can commercialize a product until the appropriate regulatory authorities, such as the FDA, European Commission or MHRA, have reviewed and approved the product candidate. The regulatory authorities may not complete their review processes in a timely manner, or we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval. Additional delays may result if an FDA Advisory Committee, or similar foreign governmental institution, recommends restrictions or conditions on approval or recommends non-approval. In addition, we or a strategic collaborator may experience delays or rejections based upon additional government regulation from future legislation or administrative action, or changes in regulatory agency or authority policy during the period of product development, clinical trials and the review process.

We cannot be sure that the FDA, the EMA or the European Commission or MHRA will accept the outcome of our preclinical testing and studies as sufficient to support the submission of an IND or a comparable foreign application or that the results of our clinical trials will be sufficient to support marketing approval. Furthermore, later clinical trials often produce unsatisfactory results even though prior clinical trials were successful. Moreover, the results of clinical trials may be unsatisfactory to the FDA, the EMA or European Commission, the MHRA or other comparable regulatory authorities even if we believe those clinical trials to be successful. The FDA, the competent authorities of EU Member States, the MHRA or other comparable regulatory authorities may suspend one or all of our clinical trials or the FDA, EMA or MHRA may require that we conduct additional clinical, preclinical, manufacturing, validation or drug product quality studies and submit that data before considering or reconsidering any new drug application, or NDA, or comparable foreign regulatory application that we may submit. Depending on the extent of these additional studies, approval of any applications that we submit may be significantly delayed or may cause the termination of such programs, or may require us to expend more resources than we have available. Regulatory authorities can delay, limit or deny approval of our product candidate for many reasons, including unsatisfactory efficacy and safety data from our trials disagreements over the design of our trial and/or manufacturing issues and a number of other factors which we and the regulators may disagree.

Even if we obtain regulatory approval for a product candidate, we will still face extensive regulatory requirements and our products may face future development and regulatory difficulties.

Even if we obtain regulatory approval in the United States and the European Union, the FDA and the European Commission may still impose significant restrictions on the indicated uses or marketing of our product candidates or impose ongoing requirements for potentially costly post-approval studies or post-market surveillance. The holder of an approved NDA in the United States, or a marketing authorization, or MA, in the European Union is obligated to monitor and report adverse events, or AEs, or adverse reactions and any failure of a product to meet the specifications in the NDA, or MA. The holder of an approved NDA or MA must also submit new or supplemental applications and obtain regulatory approval in order to make certain changes to the approved product, product labeling or manufacturing process. Advertising and promotional materials must comply with the relevant regulatory rules and, in the United States and in some EU Member States, are subject to FDA review or national regulatory review, in addition to other potentially applicable federal, state and foreign laws.

In addition, drug product manufacturers and their facilities are subject to payment of user fees or may require manufacturing and import authorizations, or MIAs, in the European Union, and continual review and periodic inspections by regulatory authorities for compliance with current good manufacturing practices, or cGMP, including quality control, quality assurance, and the maintenance of records and documentation to ensure that approved products are safe and consistently meet applicable requirements, and adherence to commitments made in the NDA or MA. We or any third party manufacturers we engage may be unable to comply with these cGMP and with other regulatory authority requirements. These requirements are enforced by regulatory authorities through periodic inspections of manufacturing facilities. If we or a regulatory authority discovers previously unknown problems with a product such as AEs of unanticipated severity or frequency, adverse reactions, or product quality issues, or problems with the facility where the product is manufactured, a regulatory authority may impose restrictions relative to that product or the manufacturing facility. A negative outcome from such inspection or a failure to provide adequate and timely corrective actions in response to deficiencies identified could result in enforcement action, including shutdown of the third-party vendor or invalidation of drug product lots or processes, warning letters, fines and civil penalties, suspension of production, suspension, variation or delay in product approval, license revocation, product seizure or recall of product candidates or approved products, plant shutdown, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions or the delay, withholding, variation or withdrawal of product approval. If the safety of any product is compromised due to a manufacturer’s failure to adhere to applicable laws or for other reasons, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or successfully commercialize our products, which would seriously harm our business.

If there are changes in the application of legislation or regulatory policies, or if problems are discovered with a product or our manufacture of a product, or if we or one of our distributors, licensees or co-marketers fails to comply with regulatory requirements that apply to the conduct of clinical trials, manufacturing approval, marketing authorization of medicinal products and marketing of such products, both before and after grant of the marketing authorization, or with other applicable regulatory requirements, the regulators could take various actions such as:

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 future products and generate revenues.

Even if we obtain and maintain approval for our product candidates in one jurisdiction, we may never obtain approval for our product candidates with other regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions. Sales of our product candidates outside of the United States and the European Union will be subject to foreign regulatory requirements governing clinical trials and marketing approval and continual regulatory review. Failure to comply with EU and EU Member State laws that apply to the conduct of clinical trials, manufacturing approval, marketing authorization of medicinal products and marketing of such products, both before and after grant of the marketing authorization, or with other applicable regulatory requirements may result in administrative, civil or criminal penalties. These penalties could include delays or refusal to authorize the conduct of clinical trials, or to grant marketing authorization, product withdrawals and recalls, product seizures, suspension, withdrawal 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.

We will be subject to ongoing obligations and oversight by regulatory authorities, including adverse event reporting requirements, marketing restrictions and, potentially, other post-marketing obligations, all of which may result in significant expense and limit our ability to commercialize such products, if approved.

We may not be able to obtain or maintain orphan drug designations for any of our product candidates, and we may be unable to maintain the benefits associated with orphan drug designation, including the potential for market exclusivity.

Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the United States, the EU and other European countries, may designate drugs or biologics for relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs. In the United States, under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan designation to a drug or biological product intended to treat a rare disease or condition. Such diseases and conditions are those that affect fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or if they affect more than 200,000 individuals in the United States, there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making a drug available in the United States for these types of diseases or conditions will be recovered from sales of the drug. However, orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting an NDA and there can be no assurance that any such designation will be granted. If the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in or shorten the duration of the regulatory review and approval process.

In the United States, orphan drug designation recipients can take advantage of special incentives provided by the FDA such as (i) potential market exclusivity of the product for seven years as the first sponsor (ii) tax credits for qualified clinical research for a designated orphan product and (iii) waiver of associated fees when submitting a marketing application to the FDA.

Similarly, in the European Union, orphan designation is intended to promote the development of medicinal products that are intended for (i) the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of life-threatening or chronically debilitating conditions (ii) either (a) such conditions affect not more than 5 in 10,000 persons in the EU when the application is made, or (b) the product without the benefits derived from orphan status, would not generate sufficient return in the EU to justify the necessary investment in developing the medicinal product; and (iii) there exists no satisfactory authorized method of diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of the condition that has been authorized in the EU, or even if such method exists, the product will be of significant benefit to those affected by that condition. In EU, orphan designation entitles a party to a number of incentives, such as fee reductions or fee waivers, protocol assistance, and access to the centralized marketing authorization procedure. Upon grant of a marketing authorization, orphan medicinal products are entitled to a ten-year period of market exclusivity for the approved therapeutic indication, which means that the EMA cannot accept another marketing authorization application or accept an application to extend for a similar product and the European Commission cannot grant a marketing authorization for the same indication for a period of ten years. The period of market exclusivity is extended by two years for orphan medicinal products that have also complied with an agreed PIP. This marketing exclusivity period can however, be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, it is established that the product no longer meets the criteria on the basis of which it received orphan medicinal product destination, including where it can be demonstrated on the basis of available evidence that the original orphan medicinal product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity or where the prevalence of the condition has increased above the threshold.

Our product candidate, divesiran (SLN124), has received orphan drug designation from the European Commission for the treatment of beta-thalassemia and from the FDA for the treatment of beta-thalassemia, myelodysplastic syndrome, or MDS, and polycythemia vera, or PV. Our drug candidate, SLN501 (collaboration with Mallinckrodt), has received orphan drug designation from the FDA for complement 3 glomerulopathy, or C3G. The EMA and the European Commission will reassess eligibility for divesiran orphan exclusivity at the time of MA review and can remove orphan status if the drug no longer meets the eligibility criteria, including offering a significant benefit to those affected, at that time. Moreover, even if we obtain orphan drug exclusivity in the future for a product candidate for these or other indications, such exclusivity may not effectively protect the product candidate from competition because different therapies can be approved for the same condition and the same therapies can be approved for different conditions but used off-label. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA or European Commission can subsequently approve a different or a similar drug for the same condition if such regulatory authority concludes that the later drug is clinically superior because it is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care. Orphan drug exclusivity may also be lost if the regulatory authority later determines that the initial request for designation was materially defective. In addition, orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent the regulatory authority from approving competing drugs for the same disease or condition containing a different active ingredient. In addition, if a subsequent drug is approved for marketing for the same disease or condition as any of our product candidates that receive marketing approval, we may face increased competition and lose market share regardless of orphan drug exclusivity.

Although we have obtained Rare Pediatric Disease Designation for Divesiran (SLN124) for the treatment of beta-thalassemia, we may not realize the expected benefits of this designation.

A sponsor who receives an approval for a drug or biologic for a “rare pediatric disease” may qualify for a voucher that can be redeemed to receive a priority review of a subsequent marketing application for a different product. The sponsor of a rare pediatric disease drug product receiving a priority review voucher may transfer (including by sale) the voucher to another sponsor. The voucher may be further transferred any number of times before the voucher is used, as long as the sponsor making the transfer has not yet submitted the application. The FDA may also revoke any priority review voucher if the rare pediatric disease drug for which the voucher was awarded is not marketed in the U.S. within one year following the date of approval.

Divesiran has been granted rare pediatric disease designation, but designation of a drug for a rare pediatric disease does not guarantee that an NDA will meet the eligibility criteria for a rare pediatric disease priority review

voucher at the time the application is approved. Specifically, under the current statutory sunset provisions, after September 30, 2026, FDA may not award any rare pediatric disease priority review vouchers. Furthermore, a Rare Pediatric Disease Designation does not lead to faster development or regulatory review of the product, or increase the likelihood that it will receive marketing approval. We may or may not realize any benefit from receiving a voucher.

We may use our financial and human resources to pursue a particular research program or product candidate and fail to capitalize on programs or product candidates that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.

Because we have limited financial and human resources, we intend to leverage our existing licensing and collaboration agreements and may enter into new strategic collaboration agreements for the development and commercialization of our programs and potential product candidates in indications with potentially large commercial markets while focusing our internal development resources, and any future internal sales and marketing organization that we may establish, on research programs and product candidates intended for selected markets or patient populations, such as rare diseases. As a result, and even as we prioritize our current product candidates and clinical trials, we may forego or delay pursuit of other programs or product candidates or other indications that later prove to have greater commercial potential. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on research and development programs and product candidates for specific indications may not yield any commercially viable products. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through strategic collaboration, licensing or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such product candidate, or we may allocate internal resources to a product candidate in a therapeutic area in which it would have been more advantageous to enter into a collaboration arrangement.

Any of our product candidates may cause adverse effects or have other properties that could delay or prevent their regulatory approval or limit the scope of any approved label or market acceptance.

AEs caused by our product candidates could cause us, other reviewing entities, clinical trial sites or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in the denial of regulatory approval. Certain oligonucleotide therapeutics have been observed to result in injection site reactions and pro-inflammatory effects and may also lead to impairment of kidney or liver function. There is a risk that our future product candidates may induce similar AEs.

If AEs are observed in any clinical trials of our product candidates, including those that a strategic collaborator may develop under an agreement with us, our or our collaborators’ ability to obtain regulatory approval for product candidates may be negatively impacted.

Further, if any of our future products, if and when approved for commercial sale, cause serious or unexpected side effects, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

Any of these events could prevent us or our collaborators from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the affected product and could substantially increase the costs of commercializing our future products and impair our ability to generate revenues from the commercialization of these products either on our own or with the collaborator.

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

The product candidates that we are developing are based upon new technologies or therapeutic approaches. Key participants in pharmaceutical marketplaces, such as physicians, third-party payers and consumers, may not accept a product intended to improve therapeutic results based on RNAi technology. As a result, it may be more difficult for us to educate the medical community and third-party payers on the benefits of our product, or to provide favorable reimbursement and market access. The degree of market acceptance of our product candidates, if approved for commercial sale, will depend on a number of factors, including:

Risks Related to Our Business Operations and Compliance with Government Regulations

We face competition from other companies that are working to develop novel drugs and technology platforms using technologies similar to ours. If these companies develop drugs more rapidly than we do or their technologies, including delivery technologies, are more effective, our ability to successfully commercialize drugs may be adversely affected.

We face potential competition from many different sources, including major pharmaceutical, specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic institutions, governmental agencies and public and private research institutions. Many of our competitors may have greater experience in research and development, manufacturing, managing clinical trials and/or regulatory compliance than we do, and may be better resourced financially. Any product candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize will compete with existing products and new products that may become available in the future. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and recruiting lead clinical trial investigators and establishing clinical study sites and patient registration for clinical studies, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs.

Companies that complete clinical trials, obtain required regulatory authority approvals and commence commercial sale of their drugs before we do may achieve a significant competitive advantage, and our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient or are less expensive than any products that we may develop and commercialize. Because our products and many potential competing products are in various stages

of preclinical and clinical development, and given the inherent unpredictability of drug development, it is difficult to predict which third parties may provide the most competition, and on what specific basis.

In addition to the competition we face from competing drugs in general, we also face competition from other companies working to develop novel drugs using technology that competes more directly with our own. We are aware of several other companies that are working to develop RNAi therapeutic products and other companies may develop alternative treatments for the diseases we have identified as being potentially treated with our siRNA molecules. To the extent those alternative treatments are more efficacious, less expensive, more convenient or produce fewer side effects, our market opportunity would be reduced.

Our future success depends on our ability to retain key executives and to attract, retain and motivate qualified personnel.

We are highly dependent on principal members of our executive team, the loss of whose services may adversely impact the achievement of our objectives. Certain of our executive officers are “at will” employees and may terminate their employment with us at any time upon prior written notice. Recruiting and retaining other qualified employees 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 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 life sciences companies for individuals with similar skill sets. In addition, failure to succeed in preclinical studies and clinical trials may make it more challenging to recruit and retain qualified personnel.

The inability to recruit or loss of the services of any executive or key employee might impede the progress of our research, development and commercialization objectives.

We may need to expand our organization and may experience difficulties in managing this growth, which could disrupt our operations.

As of December 31, 2023 we had 109 employees. In the future we may expand our employee base to increase our managerial, scientific, operational, commercial, financial and other resources and to hire more consultants and contractors. Future growth would impose significant additional responsibilities on our management, including the need to identify, recruit, maintain, motivate and integrate additional employees, consultants and contractors. Also, our management may need to divert a disproportionate amount of its attention away from its day-to-day activities and devote a substantial amount of time to managing these growth activities. We may not be able to effectively manage the expansion of our operations, which may result in weaknesses in our infrastructure, give rise to operational mistakes, loss of business opportunities, loss of employees and reduced productivity among remaining employees. Our expected growth could require significant capital expenditures and may divert financial resources from other projects, such as the development of additional product candidates. Moreover, if our management is unable to effectively manage our growth, our expenses may increase more than expected, our ability to generate and/or grow revenues could be reduced, and we may not be able to implement our business strategy. Our future financial performance and our ability to commercialize product candidates and compete effectively will depend, in part, on our ability to effectively manage any future growth.

If we fail to introduce new products or keep pace with advances in technology, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.

We spend a relatively low amount on technological innovation compared to our larger competitors. There is a risk that competitors will be quicker to develop new technologies, new products for the same gene targets or new delivery methods of nucleic acids into novel cell types, particularly once competitors learn about new gene targets that we or our collaborators have selected for the development of siRNA molecules. We will need to successfully introduce new products to achieve our strategic business objectives. Our successful product development will depend on many factors, including our ability to attract strong talent to lead our research and development efforts, adapt to new technologies, obtain regulatory approvals on a timely basis, demonstrate satisfactory clinical results, manufacture products in an economical and timely manner, obtain appropriate intellectual property protection for our products, gain and maintain market acceptance of our products, and differentiate our products from those of our competitors. In

addition, patents attained by others may preclude or delay our commercialization of a product. There can be no assurance that any products now in development or that we may seek to develop in the future will achieve technological feasibility, obtain regulatory approval or gain market acceptance. If we cannot successfully introduce new products or adapt to changing technologies, our products may become obsolete and our revenue and profitability could suffer.

We face potential product liability and other claims, and, if successful claims are brought against us, we may incur substantial liability and costs.

The use of our product candidates in clinical trials and the sale of any products for which we obtain marketing approval exposes us to the risk of product liability claims, including claims related to impurities in our products or potential product recalls. Certain single-stranded oligonucleotide therapeutics have led to injection site reactions and pro-inflammatory effects and may also lead to impairment of kidney or liver function. There is a risk that our current and future product candidates, although double-stranded, may induce similar or other adverse events. Product liability claims might be brought against us by consumers, healthcare providers, life sciences companies or others selling or otherwise coming into contact with our products; other claims may be brought against us by third parties with whom we contract, or by current or former employees or consultants, including claims of wrongful terminations, discrimination, other violations of labor law or other alleged conduct. If we cannot successfully defend against such claims, we could incur substantial liability and costs. In addition, regardless of merit or eventual outcome, such claims may result in, among other things:

We maintain product liability insurance relating to the use of our therapeutics in clinical trials. However, such insurance coverage may not be sufficient to reimburse us for any expenses or losses we may suffer. Moreover, insurance coverage is becoming increasingly expensive and in the future we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses due to liability. If and when we obtain marketing approval for product candidates, we intend to expand our insurance coverage to include the sale of commercial products; however, we may be unable to obtain product liability insurance on commercially reasonable terms or in adequate amounts. On occasion, large judgments have been awarded in class action lawsuits based on drugs that had unanticipated adverse effects. A successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against us could cause our stock price to decline and, if judgments exceed our insurance coverage, could adversely affect our results of operations and business.

Cybersecurity risks and the failure to maintain the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of our computer hardware, software, data and internet applications and related tools and functions could result in damage to our reputation and/or subject us to costs, fines or lawsuits.

Our business requires manipulating, analyzing and storing large amounts of sensitive data, and, as a result, we and the third parties upon which we rely face a variety of evolving threats that could cause security incidents. Our business therefore depends on the continuous, effective, reliable, and secure operation of our computer hardware, software, networks, internet servers, third party technology service providers and related infrastructure. To the extent that our hardware or software, or the hardware or software of the third parties on whom we rely, malfunctions or

access to our data by internal research personnel is interrupted, our business could suffer. Cyber-attacks, malicious internet-based activity, online and offline fraud, and other similar activities threaten the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of our sensitive data and information technology systems, and those of the third parties upon which we rely. The regulatory environment governing information, security and privacy laws is increasingly demanding and continues to evolve, as further described below. Maintaining compliance with applicable security and privacy regulations may increase our operating costs. While we have implemented security measures designed to protect against security incidents, there can be no assurance that these measures will be effective. We and the third parties upon which we rely are subject to a variety of evolving threats, including but not limited to social-engineering attacks (including through deep fakes, which may be increasingly more difficult to identify as fake, and phishing attacks), denial-of-service attacks, credential stuffing, credential harvesting, ransomware attacks, supply-chain attacks, server malfunctions, software or hardware failures, loss of data or other information technology assets, adware, attacks enhanced or facilitated by AI, fire, storm, flood, power loss, earthquakes, telecommunications failures, physical or software break-ins, software viruses, accidental or malicious insider-action and other similar threats. These events could lead to the unauthorized access, disclosure and use of our sensitive data. The techniques used by criminal elements to attack computer systems are sophisticated, change frequently and may originate from less regulated and remote areas of the world and increasingly involve highly resourced threat actors such as organized criminals and nation states. As a result, we cannot provide assurance that our efforts to address these techniques proactively or implement adequate preventative measures will always be successful.

Remote work has become more common and has increased risks to our information technology systems and data, as more of our employees utilize network connections, computers, and devices outside our premises or network, including working at home, while in transit and in public locations. Additionally, future or past business transactions (such as acquisitions or integrations) could expose us to additional cybersecurity risks and vulnerabilities, as our systems could be negatively affected by vulnerabilities present in acquired or integrated entities’ systems and technologies. We may discover security issues that were not found during due diligence of such acquired or integrated entities, and it may be difficult to integrate companies into our information technology environment and security program.

We rely on third-party service providers and technologies to operate critical business systems that process sensitive data. Our ability to monitor these third parties’ information security practices is limited, and these third parties may not have adequate information security measures in place. If our third-party service providers experience a security incident or other interruption, we could experience adverse consequences. While we may be entitled to damages if our third-party service providers fail to satisfy their privacy or security-related obligations to us, any award may be insufficient to cover our damages, or we may be unable to recover such award.

If we (or a third party upon whom we rely on) experience a security incident or are perceived to have experienced a security incident, we could experience adverse consequences, such as fines, damages, litigation and enforcement actions, additional reporting requirements and/or oversight, restrictions on processing sensitive data (including personal data), indemnification obligations; negative publicity, reputational harm, monetary fund diversions, diversion of management attention, and interruptions in our operations (including availability of clinical trial data). In addition, any sustained disruption in internet systems or network access provided by other companies could harm our business. Similarly, if a security incident were to occur we may be required to disclose such event. Such disclosures are costly, and the disclosure or the failure to comply with such requirements could lead to adverse consequences, including reputational damage, investigations and fines from regulators, as well as litigation. Furthermore, if we are required to disclose the occurrence of a cybersecurity incident, the price of our ADSs may be negatively impacted.

Our contracts may not contain limitations of liability, and even where they do, there can be no assurance that limitations of liability in our contracts are sufficient to protect us from liabilities, damages, or claims related to our data privacy and security obligations.

Additionally, sensitive data of the Company could be leaked, disclosed, or revealed as a result of or in connection with our employees’, personnel’s, or vendors’ use of generative artificial intelligence (“AI”) technologies.

We are subject to stringent and evolving data privacy and security laws, regulations contractual obligations, industry standards, policies, and other obligations, and our actual or perceived failure to comply with such

obligations could lead to regulatory investigations or actions; litigation (including class actions); fines and penalties; disruptions of our business operations; reputational harm; loss of revenue or profits; and other adverse business consequences.

In the ordinary course of business, we collect, receive, store, process, generate, use, transfer, disclose, make accessible, protect, secure, dispose of, transmit, and share (collectively, process) personal data and other sensitive information, including proprietary and confidential business data, trade secrets, intellectual property, sensitive third-party data, business plans, transactions, clinical trial data and financial information (collectively, sensitive data).

Our data processing activities subject us to privacy and data protection obligations, such as various laws, regulations, industry standards, external and internal privacy and security policies, contractual requirements, and other obligations relating to data privacy and security. The legislative and regulatory landscape for privacy and data protection continues to evolve, and there has been an increasing amount of focus on compliance in this area, with the potential to affect our business.

In the European Union and the United Kingdom, the collection and use of personal data (including health data) is governed by the provisions of the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation ("EU GDPR") and the United Kingdom’s GDPR ("U.K. GDPR") respectively. The EU GDPR and U.K. GDPR apply to the processing of personal data (i) by businesses established in the European Economic Area (“EEA”) or the United Kingdom, regardless of whether the processing takes place in the EEA or the United Kingdom, or (ii) of individuals located in the EEA or the United Kingdom, by businesses established outside of the EEA or the United Kingdom, where they process personal data to (a) offer goods or services to individuals in the EEA or the United Kingdom, or (b) monitor their behavior, as it takes place in the EEA or the United Kingdom (e.g., carrying out clinical trial activities in the EEA or the United Kingdom).

The EU GDRP and U.K. GDPR imposes data protection obligations on organizations processing personal data, including:

The GDPR also imposes strict rules on the transfer of personal data out of the EEA or United Kingdom to third countries, including the United States. In order to transfer personal data outside of the EEA/United Kingdom, businesses will need to rely on (i) an adequacy decision (i.e., a finding by the European Commission or the United Kingdom that the destination country offers an “adequate” level of data protection), (ii) an appropriate safeguard (e.g., Standard Contractual Clauses, the United Kingdom’s International Data Transfer Agreement / Addendum, and the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework and the United Kingdom’s extension thereto (which allows for transfers to relevant U.S.-based organizations who self-certify compliance and participate in the Framework)), or (iii) a derogation. Failure to comply with the requirements of the EU’s GDPR may result in fines of up to 4% of an undertaking’s total global annual turnover for the preceding financial year, or €20,000,000, whichever is greater. Failure to comply with the U.K. GDPR may result in fines of up to 4% of total global annual turnover or £17,500,000 for violations of the U.K.

GDPR. In addition to administrative fines, a wide variety of other potential enforcement powers are available to data supervisory authorities in respect of potential and suspected violations of the EU GDPR, including extensive audit and inspection rights, and powers to order temporary or permanent bans on all or some processing of personal data carried out by noncompliant actors. While we have taken steps to comply with the EU GDPR, and implementing legislation in applicable EU member states and the United Kingdom, including seeking to establish appropriate lawful bases for the various processing activities we carry out as a controller, adopting an international transfer mechanism, where applicable, reviewing our security procedures, and entering into data processing agreements with relevant vendors and business partners, we cannot guarantee that our efforts to achieve and remain in compliance have been, and/or will continue to be, fully successful.

Also, following the expiry of the post-Brexit transitional arrangements, the U.K. Information Commissioner’s Office cannot be our “lead supervisory authority” in respect of any “cross border processing” for the purposes of the EU’s GDPR. For so long as we are unable to, and/or do not, designate a lead supervisory authority in an EEA member state, we are not able to benefit from the EU GDPR’s “one stop shop” mechanism. Among other things, this would mean that, in the event of a violation of the EU GDPR and U.K. GDPR affecting data subjects across the United Kingdom and the EEA, we could be investigated by, and ultimately fined by the U.K. Information Commissioner’s Office and the supervisory authority in each and every EEA member state where data subjects have been affected by such violation. Other countries have also passed or are considering passing laws requiring local data residency and/or restricting the international transfer of data.

Similarly, failure to comply with federal and state laws in the United States regarding privacy and security of personal data could further expose us to penalties under privacy and data protection laws. Even if we are not determined to have violated these laws, government investigations into these issues typically require the expenditure of significant resources and generate negative publicity, which could harm our business.

In addition, on occasion our employees and personnel use generative AI technologies to perform their work, and the disclosure and use of personal data in generative AI technologies is subject to various privacy laws and other privacy obligations. Governments have passed and are likely to pass additional laws regulating generative AI. Our use of this technology could result in additional compliance costs, regulatory investigations and actions, and lawsuits. If we are unable to use generative AI, it could make our business less efficient and result in competitive disadvantages.

Our employees, consultants and contractors may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements or insider trading violations, which could significantly harm our business.

We are exposed to the risk of employee fraud or other misconduct. Misconduct by employees, consultants or contractors could include intentional failures to comply with governmental regulations, comply with healthcare fraud and abuse and anti-kickback laws and regulations in the United States, the EU Member States, the United Kingdom and other jurisdictions, or failure to report financial information or data accurately or disclose unauthorized activities to us. In particular, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, misconduct, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Employee misconduct could also involve the improper use of, including improper trading based upon, information obtained in the course of clinical studies, which could result in regulatory sanctions and serious harm to our reputation. We have adopted a code of business conduct and ethics and a robust compliance program, 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 and results of operations, including the imposition of significant fines or other sanctions.

Our relationships with U.S. healthcare providers, including physicians, and third-party payers will be subject to applicable U.S. anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, anti-bribery and other healthcare laws and regulations,

which could expose us to criminal sanctions, civil penalties, contractual damages, reputational harm and diminished profits and future earnings.

Healthcare providers and third-party payers play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. Our current and future arrangements with healthcare providers, third-party payers and customers may expose us to broadly applicable U.S. federal and state fraud and abuse, transparency, health data privacy, and other healthcare laws and regulations that may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we research as well as market, sell and distribute our products for which we obtain marketing approval. If we are found to be in violation of any of any healthcare laws or any other federal or state regulations, we may be subject to significant administrative, civil and/or criminal penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from federal health care programs, additional reporting requirements and/or oversight, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations.

Healthcare legislative and other regulatory reform measures may have a negative impact on our business and results of operations.

In the United States, there have been, and continue to be, legislative and regulatory developments regarding the healthcare system that could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities, and affect our ability to profitably sell any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. Additionally, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny in the United States of pharmaceutical pricing practices in light of the rising cost of prescription drugs and biologics. Such scrutiny has resulted in several recent congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, require direct price negotiations for certain high-expenditure, single-source prescription drugs and biologics covered by the Medicare program, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for products. While any proposed measures will require authorization through additional legislation to become effective, Congress and the current administration have each indicated that they will continue to seek new legislative and/or administrative measures to control drug costs. At the state level, legislatures are increasingly passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or successfully commercialize our drugs.

In addition, the policies of the FDA, the competent authorities of the EU Member States, the EMA, the European Commission and other comparable regulatory authorities responsible for clinical trials may change and additional government regulations may be enacted. For instance, the regulatory landscape related to clinical trials in the EU recently evolved. The EU Clinical Trials Regulation, or CTR, which was adopted in April 2014 and repeals the EU Clinical Trials Directive, became applicable on January 31, 2022. The CTR allows sponsors to make a single submission to both the competent authority and an ethics committee in each EU Member State, leading to a single decision for each EU Member State. The assessment procedure for the authorization of clinical trials has been harmonized as well, including a joint assessment by all EU Member States concerned, and a separate assessment by each EU Member State with respect to specific requirements related to its own territory, including ethics rules. Each EU Member State’s decision is communicated to the sponsor via the centralized EU portal. Once the clinical trial approved, clinical study development may proceed. The CTR foresees a three-year transition period. The extent to which ongoing and new clinical trials will be governed by the CTR varies.For clinical trials in relation to which application for approval was made on the basis of the Clinical Trials Directive before January 31, 2023, the Clinical Trials Directive will continue to apply on a transitional basis until January 31, 2025. By that date, all ongoing trials will become subject to the provisions of the CTR. The CTR will apply to clinical trials from an earlier date if the related clinical trial application was made on the basis of the CTR or if the clinical trial has already transitioned to the CTR framework before January 31, 2025. Compliance with the CTR requirements by us and our third-party service providers, such as CROs, may impact our developments plans. In light of the entry into application of the CTR on January 31, 2022, we may be required to transition clinical trials for which we have obtained regulatory approvals in accordance with the CTD to the regulatory framework of the CTR. Transition of clinical trials governed by the CTD to the CTR will be required for clinical trials which will have at least one site active in the E.U. on January 30, 2025. A transitioning application would need to be submitted to the competent authorities of E.U. Member States through

the Clinical Trials Information Systems and related regulatory approval obtained to continue the clinical trial past January 30, 2025. This would require financial, technical and human resources. If we are unable to transition our clinical trials in time, the conduct of those clinical trials may be negatively impacted.[CEULS1]

It is currently unclear to what extent the UK will seek to align its regulations with the EU in the future. The UK

regulatory framework in relation to clinical trials is derived from existing EU legislation (as implemented into

UK law, through secondary legislation). On January 17, 2022, the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, or MHRA, launched an eight-week consultation on reframing the UK legislation for clinical trials. The UK Government published its response to the consultation on March 21, 2023 confirming that it would bring forward changes to the legislation. These resulting legislative amendments will determine how closely the UK regulations will align with the CTR. Failure of the UK to closely align its regulations with the EU may have an effect on the cost of conducting clinical trials in the UK as opposed to other countries and/or make it harder to seek a marketing authorization for the Company's product candidates on the basis of clinical trials conducted in the United Kingdom.

Moreover, in order to obtain reimbursement for our products in some European countries, including some EU Member States, we may be required to compile additional data comparing the cost-effectiveness of our products to other available therapies. This Health Technology Assessment (“HTA”) of medicinal products is becoming an increasingly common part of the pricing and reimbursement procedures in some EU Member States, including those representing the larger markets. The HTA process is the procedure to assess therapeutic, economic and societal impact of a given medicinal product in the national healthcare systems of the individual country. The outcome of an HTA will often influence the pricing and reimbursement status granted to these medicinal products by the competent authorities of individual EU Member States. The extent to which pricing and reimbursement decisions are influenced by the HTA of the specific medicinal product currently varies between EU Member States. In December 2021, Regulation No 2021/2282 on HTA amending Directive 2011/24/EU, was adopted in the EU. This Regulation, which entered into force in January 2022 and will apply as of January 2025, is intended to boost cooperation among EU Member States in assessing health technologies, including new medicinal products, and providing the basis for cooperation at EU level for joint clinical assessments in these areas. The Regulation foresees a three-year transitional period and will permit EU Member States to use common HTA tools, methodologies, and procedures across the EU, working together in four main areas, including joint clinical assessment of the innovative health technologies with the most potential impact for patients, joint scientific consultations whereby developers can seek advice from HTA authorities, identification of emerging health technologies to identify promising technologies early, and continuing voluntary cooperation in other areas. Individual EU Member States will continue to be responsible for assessing non-clinical (e.g., economic, social, ethical) aspects of health technologies, and making decisions on pricing and reimbursement. If we are unable to maintain favorable pricing and reimbursement status in EU Member States for product candidates that we may successfully develop and for which we may obtain regulatory approval, any anticipated revenue from and growth prospects for those products in the EU could be negatively affected. In light of the fact that the United Kingdom has left the EU, Regulation No 2021/2282 on HTA will not apply in the United Kingdom. However, the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulation Agency (“MHRA”) is working with UK HTA bodies and other national organizations, such as the Scottish Medicines Consortium (“SMC”), the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (“NICE”), and the All-Wales Medicines Strategy Group, to introduce new pathways supporting innovative approaches to the safe, timely and efficient development of medicinal products.

In addition, on April 26, 2023, the European Commission adopted a proposal for a new Directive and Regulation to revise the existing pharmaceutical legislation. If adopted in the form proposed, the recent European Commission proposals to revise the existing EU laws governing authorization of medicinal products may result in a decrease in data and market exclusivity opportunities for our product candidates in the EU and make them open to generic or biosimilar competition earlier than is currently the case with a related reduction in reimbursement status.

If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, our development plans may be impacted.

The United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the EU may have a negative effect on global economic conditions, financial markets and our business, which could reduce the price of our common shares.

Following Brexit,the UK and the EU signed a EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement, or TCA, which became provisionally applicable on January 1, 2021 and entered into force on May 1, 2021. This agreement provides details

on how some aspects of the UK and EU’s relationship will operate going forwards however there are still uncertainties. The TCA primarily focuses on ensuring free trade between the EU and the UK in relation to goods, including medicinal products. Among the changes that have occurred are that Great Britain (England,Scotland and Wales) is treated as a “third country,”a country that is not a member of the EU and whose citizens do not enjoy the EU right to free movement.Northern Ireland continues to follow many aspects of the EU regulatory rules, particularly in relation to trade in goods. As part of the TCA, the EU and the UK recognize GMP inspections carried out by the other party and the acceptance of official GMP documents issued by the other party. The TCA also encourages, although it does not oblige, the parties to consult one another on proposals to introduce significant changes to technical regulations or inspection procedures. Among the areas of absence of mutual recognition are batch testing and batch release.The UK has unilaterally agreed to accept EU batch testing and batch release. However, the EU continues to apply EU laws that require batch testing and batch release to take place in the EU territory. This means that medicinal products that are tested and released in the UK must be retested and re-released when entering the EU market for commercial use.

As it relates to marketing authorizations, Great Britain has a separate regulatory submission process, approval process and a separate national marketing authorization. Northern Ireland continues, however, to be covered by the marketing authorizations granted by the European Commission. For example, the scope of a marketing authorization for a medicinal product granted by the European Commission or by the competent authorities of EU Member States no longer encompasses Great Britain (England,Scotland and Wales). In these circumstances, a separate marketing authorization granted by the UK competent authorities is required to place medicinal products on the market in Great Britain. Northern Ireland continues, however, to be covered by the marketing authorizations granted by the European Commission.

On February 27, 2023, the UK Government and the European Commission reached a political agreement on the so-called “Windsor Framework”. The Framework is intended to revise the Northern Ireland Protocol to address some of the perceived shortcomings in its operation. The agreement was adopted at the Withdrawal Agreement Joint Committee on March 24, 2023. If the changes are adopted in the form proposed, medicinal products to be placed on the market in the UK will be authorized solely in accordance with UK laws. Northern Ireland would be reintegrated back into a UK-only regulatory environment under the authority of the MHRA with respect to all medicinal products. The implementation of the Windsor Framework would occur in stages, with new arrangements relating to the supply of medicinal products into Northern Ireland anticipated to take effect in 2025.

A significant proportion of the regulatory framework in the UK applicable to medicinal products is currently derived from EU Directives and Regulations. The potential for UK legislation to diverge from EU legislation following Brexit could materially impact the regulatory regime with respect to the development, manufacture, import, approval, and commercialization of our product candidates in the UK or the EU. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies governing clinical trials, our development plans may be impacted.

All of these changes could increase our costs and otherwise adversely affect our business. Any delay in obtaining, or an inability to obtain, any regulatory approvals, as a result of Brexit or otherwise, would prevent us from commercializing our product candidates in the UK or the EU and restrict our ability to generate revenue and achieve and sustain profitability. In addition, we may be required to pay taxes or duties or be subjected to other hurdles in connection with the importation of our product candidates into the EU. If any of these outcomes occur, we may be forced to restrict or delay efforts to seek regulatory approval in the UK or the EU for our product candidates, or incur significant additional expenses to operate our business, which could significantly and materially harm or delay our ability to generate revenues or achieve profitability of our business.Any further changes in international trade, tariff and import/export regulations as a result of Brexit or otherwise may impose unexpected duty costs or other non-tariff barriers on us. These developments, or the perception that any of them could occur, may significantly reduce global trade and, in particular, trade between the impacted nations and the UK. It is also possible that Brexit may negatively affect our ability to attract and retain employees, particularly those from the EU.

We may face uncertainty related to pricing, coverage and reimbursement for our product candidates.

Sales of our product candidates in the U.S., if approved, will depend, in part, on the extent to which such products will be covered by third-party payers, such as government health care programs, commercial insurance and managed

healthcare organizations. These third-party payers are increasingly limiting coverage and/or reducing reimbursements for medical products and services. A third-party payer’s decision to provide coverage for a drug product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Further, one payer’s determination to provide coverage for a drug product does not ensure that other payers will also provide coverage for the drug product. Coverage policies and third-party payer reimbursement rates may change at any time. In addition, the U.S. government, state legislatures and foreign governments have continued implementing cost-containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products. Adoption of price controls and cost-containment measures, and adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures, could further limit our net revenue and results. Decreases in third-party payer reimbursement or a decision by a third-party payer to not cover any of our product candidates, if approved, could reduce physician usage of our product candidates, and have a material adverse effect on our sales, results of operations and financial condition. If we are unable to obtain adequate levels of reimbursement, our ability to successfully market and sell any product candidates will be harmed.

Exchange rate fluctuations may adversely affect our results of operations and cash flows.

The Company's consolidated financial statements are presented in U.K. pounds sterling. The individual financial statements of each subsidiary is prepared in the currency of the primary economic environment in which the entity operates (its functional currency). Our transactions are commonly denominated in U.K pounds sterling, however we receive payments under our collaboration agreements in U.S. dollars and we incur a portion of our expenses in other currencies, primarily Euros. As a result, fluctuations in exchange rates, particularly between the pound sterling on the one hand and the U.S. dollar and Euro on the other hand, may adversely affect our reported results of operations and cash flows. Our business and the price of our ADSs may be affected by fluctuations in foreign exchange rates between the pound sterling and these and other currencies, any of which may have a significant impact on our results of operations and cash flows from period to period.

If we fail to comply with environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, we could become subject to fines or penalties or incur costs that could have a material adverse effect on the success of our business.

We are subject to numerous environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those governing laboratory procedures and the handling, use, storage, treatment and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes. Our operations involve the use of hazardous and flammable materials, including chemicals and biological materials. Our operations also produce hazardous waste products. We generally contract with third parties for the disposal of these materials and wastes. We cannot eliminate the risk of contamination or injury from these materials. In the event of contamination or injury resulting from our use of hazardous materials, we could be held liable for any resulting damages, and any liability could exceed our resources. We also could incur significant costs associated with civil or criminal fines and penalties.

Although we maintain workers’ compensation insurance to cover us for costs and expenses we may incur due to injuries to our employees resulting from the use of hazardous materials or other work-related injuries, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities. In addition, we may incur substantial costs in order to comply with current or future environmental, health and safety laws and regulations. These current or future laws and regulations may impair our research, development or production efforts. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations also may result in substantial fines, penalties or other sanctions.

Inflation may adversely affect our operations, including increases in the prices of goods and services required for our operations.

High rates of inflation resulting from global events may adversely affect our operations in the event of increased prices of goods and services, such as energy and other operating costs, labor costs, materials costs and shipping costs, all of which may impact our direct costs. We are also experiencing increases in the cost of services provided by CMOs, CROs and other third parties with whom we do business, including significant increases in the cost of non-human primates required for studies. Such high inflation rates may result in unexpected and unbudgeted cost increases and may require changes to planned investments.

Risks Related to our Intellectual Property

If we are unable to obtain or protect intellectual property rights related to our current or future products and product candidates, we may not be able to compete effectively in our markets.

We rely upon a combination of patents, trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect the intellectual property related to our current and future products and product candidates. The strength of patents in the biotechnology and life sciences field involves complex legal and scientific questions and can be uncertain. The patent applications that we own may fail to result in patents with claims that cover our current and future product candidates in the United States, European countries or in other territories. Even if patents do successfully issue, third parties may challenge their validity, enforceability or scope, which may result in such patents being narrowed or invalidated and our patents and patent applications may not adequately protect our intellectual property, or our current and future product candidates, and may not prevent others from designing around our claims.

If the patent applications we hold and/or have out-licensed with respect to our product candidates fail to issue or if their breadth or strength of protection is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to develop product candidates, and threaten our ability to commercialize, future products. We cannot offer any assurances about which, if any, patents will issue or whether any issued patents will be found invalid and unenforceable or will be threatened by third parties. A patent may be challenged through one or more of several administrative proceedings including Inter Partes Review, Post Grant Review, re-examination or opposition before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, or the USPTO, or European Patent Office, or the EPO, and by way of similar proceedings in certain other jurisdictions. For example, re-examination of, or oppositions to, patents owned by us have previously been initiated, and while we believe these proceedings did not or will not result in a commercially relevant impact on the individual patents, any successful challenge of patents or any other patents owned by us could deprive us of rights necessary for the successful commercialization of any product candidates that we or our strategic alliance partners may develop. Since patent applications in the United States and most other countries are confidential for a period of up to 18 months after filing, and some remain confidential until issued, we cannot be certain that we were the first to file any patent application related to a product candidate or an siRNA related technology or method. Furthermore, in certain situations, if we and one or more third parties have filed patent applications in the United States claiming the same subject matter, an administrative proceeding, known as a derivation proceeding (previously known as an interference), can be initiated to determine which applicant is entitled to the patent on that subject matter. Such administrative proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by us may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions with respect to our patents or patent applications, or those of our alliance partners. An unfavorable outcome could require us to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights to us from the prevailing party. Our business could be harmed if the prevailing party does not offer us a license on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Our defense of a patent or patent application in such a proceeding may not be successful and, even if successful, may result in narrowed claims, which may or may not cover our current or future products and product candidates, and at substantial costs and distraction to our management and other employees.

In addition, patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States and many other countries and regions of the world including Europe, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years after it is filed as a non-provisional patent application, or a PCT international patent application. Various extensions may be available, however, the life of a patent and the protection it affords is limited. Once the patent life has expired for a product, we may be open to competition from generic medications. Further, if we encounter delays in regulatory approvals, the period of time during which we could market a product candidate under patent protection could be reduced.

In addition to the protection afforded by patents, we rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect proprietary know-how that is not patentable, processes for which patents are difficult to enforce and any other elements of our drug discovery and development processes that involve proprietary know-how, information or technology that is not covered by patents. Although each of our Silence Therapeutics GmbH employees either has to assign their inventions to us under German Employee Invention Law, or agrees to assign their inventions to us through an employee inventions agreement, and all of our employees, consultants, advisers and any third parties who have access to our proprietary know-how, information or technology enter into confidentiality agreements, we cannot provide any assurances that all such agreements have been duly executed or that our trade secrets and other confidential proprietary information will not be disclosed or that competitors will not otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or confidential proprietary information, or independently develop substantially equivalent information

and techniques. In addition, others may independently discover our trade secrets, proprietary know-how and information. For example, the FDA, as part of its transparency initiative, is currently considering whether to make additional information publicly available on a routine basis, including information that we may consider to be trade secrets or other proprietary information, and it is not clear at the present time how the FDA’s disclosure policies may change in the future, if at all.

Further, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent or in the same manner as the laws of the United States. As a result, we may encounter significant problems in protecting and defending our intellectual property in the United States, Europe and in other jurisdictions. If we are unable to prevent material disclosure of the non-patented intellectual property related to our technologies to third parties, and there is no guarantee that we will have any such enforceable trade secret protection, we may not be able to establish or maintain a competitive advantage in our market, which could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Third-party claims of intellectual property infringement may prevent or delay our development and commercialization efforts.

Our commercial success depends in part on our avoiding infringement of the patents and proprietary rights of third parties. There is a substantial amount of litigation, both within and outside the United States, involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and life sciences industries, including patent infringement lawsuits. Numerous U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications, which are owned by third parties, exist in the fields in which we and our strategic collaborators are pursuing development candidates and technologies.

Third parties may assert that we are employing their proprietary technology without authorization. There may be third-party patents or patent applications with claims to sequences, structures, materials, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods for treatment related to the use or manufacture of our product candidates that are broad enough to cover one of our product candidates or use of our technologies. Because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending patent applications which may later result in patents with claims that our product candidates or use of our technologies may infringe. In addition, third parties may have or may obtain in the future patents and assert that our product candidates or use of our technologies infringes upon one or more claims of these patents. If any third-party patents were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be valid and enforceable and to cover the manufacturing process of any of our product candidates, any molecules formed during the manufacturing process or any final product itself, the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to commercialize such product candidate, if approved, unless we obtained a license under the applicable patents, or until such patents expire. Similarly, if any third-party patents were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be valid and enforceable and to cover aspects of our compositions, formulations or methods of use, including combination therapy, the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to develop and commercialize the applicable product candidate unless we obtained a license or until such patent expires. In either case, such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all.

Parties making claims against us may obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could effectively block our ability to further develop and commercialize one or more of our product candidates. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, could involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of our management, other employees and resources from our business. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may have to pay substantial damages, including up to treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, pay royalties, redesign our infringing products or obtain one or more licenses from third parties, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure.

We may be involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or the patents of our licensors, which could be expensive, time-consuming and unsuccessful.

Competitors may infringe our patents or the patents of our licensors. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming, even if we ultimately prevail. For example, in 2017, we commenced patent infringement litigation against Alnylam Pharmaceuticals Inc., or Alnylam. In December 2018, we and Alnylam entered into a settlement and license agreement to settle the litigation, which was related to Alnylam’s RNAi product ONPATTRO. As part of the settlement, we

licensed specified patents to Alnylam, and Alnylam paid us a tiered royalty of up to one percent of its net sales of ONPATTRO in the European Union through December 2023.

In addition to the costs and potential distraction associated with enforcing our patents in a lawsuit, in an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours or our licensors 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 patents do not cover the technology in question. An adverse result in any litigation or defense proceedings could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing which could negatively impact our ability to develop and potentially commercialize our product candidates, if approved.

Our efforts in a litigation may fail and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and be a distraction to our management and other employees. We may not be able to prevent, alone or with our licensors, misappropriation of our intellectual property rights, particularly in countries where the laws may not protect those rights as fully as in the United States.

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. There could also 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, it could have a material adverse effect on the price of our ADSs.

We may be subject to claims that our employees, consultants or independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information of third parties.

We employ individuals who were previously employed at other biotechnology or life sciences companies. We may be subject to claims that our employees, consultants or independent contractors have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed confidential information of our employees’ former employers or other third parties. We may also be subject to claims that former employers or other third parties have an ownership interest in our patents. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. There is no guarantee of success in defending these claims, and even if we are successful, litigation could result in substantial cost and be a distraction to our management and other employees.

Risks Related to Our ADSs

The trading price of our ADSs may be volatile, and you could lose all or part of your investment.

The trading price of our ADSs is likely to be highly volatile and could be subject to wide fluctuations in response to various factors, some of which are beyond our control. The stock market in general and the market for biopharmaceutical companies in particular have experienced extreme volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies. As a result of this volatility, investors may not be able to sell their ADSs at or above the price paid for the ADSs. In addition to the factors discussed in this “Risk Factors” section and elsewhere in this report, factors that are expected to affect the market price of our securities include:

These and other market and industry factors may cause the market price and demand for our ADSs to fluctuate substantially, regardless of our actual operating performance, which may limit or prevent investors from selling their ADSs at or above the price paid for the ADSs and may otherwise negatively affect the liquidity of our ADSs.

Some companies that have experienced volatility in the trading price of their shares have been the subject of securities class action litigation. Any lawsuit to which we are a party, with or without merit, may result in an unfavorable judgment. We also may decide to settle lawsuits on unfavorable terms.

Any such negative outcome could result in payments of substantial damages or fines, damage to our reputation or adverse changes to our business practices. Defending against litigation is costly and time-consuming and could divert our management’s and key employees’ attention and our resources. Furthermore, during the course of litigation, there could be negative public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments, which could have a negative effect on the market price of our ADSs.

Future sales, or the possibility of future sales, of a substantial number of our ADSs could adversely affect the price of such securities.

Future sales of a substantial number of ADSs, or the perception that such sales will occur, could cause a decline in the market price of our ADSs. If our shareholders sell substantial amounts of ADSs on Nasdaq, or if the market perceives that such sales may occur, the market price of the ADSs and our ability to raise capital through an issue of equity securities in the future could be adversely affected.

If equity research analysts do not publish research or reports, or publish unfavorable research or reports, about us, our business or our market, the price and trading volume of our ADSs could decline.

The trading market for our ADSs may be influenced by the research and reports that equity research analysts publish about us and our business. As a company admitted to trading on Nasdaq, our equity securities are currently subject to coverage by a number of analysts. Equity research analysts may elect not to provide research coverage of our ADSs, and such lack of research coverage may adversely affect the market price of our ADSs. We will not have any control over the analysts or the content and opinions included in their reports. The price of our ADSs could decline if one or more equity research analysts downgrade our ADSs or issue other unfavorable commentary or research about us. If one or more equity research analysts ceases coverage of us or fails to publish reports on us regularly, demand for our ADSs could decrease, which in turn could cause the trading price or trading volume of our ADSs to decline.

Concentration of ownership of our ordinary shares (including ordinary shares represented by ADSs) among our existing senior management, directors and principal shareholders may prevent new investors from influencing significant corporate decisions and matters submitted to shareholders for approval.

Members of our senior management, directors and current beneficial owners of 5% or more of our ordinary shares and their respective affiliates, in the aggregate, beneficially owned approximately 58% of our issued and outstanding ordinary shares, based on the number of ordinary shares issued and outstanding as of March 1, 2024. As a result, depending on the level of attendance at general meetings of our shareholders, these persons, acting together, would be able to significantly influence all matters requiring shareholder approval, including the election, re-election and removal of directors, any merger, scheme of arrangement, or sale of all or substantially all of our assets, or other significant corporate transactions, and amendments to our articles of association. In addition, these persons, acting together, may have the ability to control the management and affairs of our company. Accordingly, this concentration of ownership may harm the market price of our ADSs by:

In addition, some of these persons or entities may have interests different than yours. For example, because many of these shareholders purchased their shares at prices substantially below the current market price of our ordinary shares and have held their shares for a longer period, they may be more interested in selling our company to an acquirer than other investors, or they may want us to pursue strategies that deviate from the interests of other shareholders.

Because we do not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our ordinary shares (including ordinary shares represented by ADSs) in the foreseeable future, capital appreciation, if any, will be your sole source of gains and you may never receive a return on your investment.

You should not rely on an investment in our ADSs to provide dividend income. Under current English law, a company’s accumulated realized profits must exceed its accumulated realized losses (on a non-consolidated basis) before dividends can be paid. Therefore, we must have distributable profits before issuing a dividend. We have never declared or paid a dividend on our ordinary shares in the past, and we currently intend to retain our future earnings, if

any, to fund the development of our technologies and product candidates and the growth of our business. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, on our ADSs will be your sole source of gains for the foreseeable future. Investors seeking cash dividends should not purchase our ADSs.

We incur increased costs as a result of having our ADSs listed in the United States, and our senior management will be required to devote substantial time to new compliance initiatives and corporate governance practices.

As a company whose securities are publicly listed in the United States, and particularly after we no longer qualify as an “emerging growth company,” or EGC, we incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses. For example, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and the Consumer Protection Act, the listing requirements of Nasdaq and other applicable U.S. securities rules and regulations impose various requirements on non-U.S. reporting public companies, including the establishment and maintenance of effective disclosure and financial controls and corporate governance practices. Our senior management and other personnel need to devote a substantial amount of time to these compliance initiatives. Moreover, these rules and regulations have increased our legal and financial compliance costs and have made some activities more time-consuming and costly, including obtaining director and officer liability insurance.

Pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or Section 404, regardless of whether or not we are an EGC, we are required to furnish a report by our senior management on our internal control over financial reporting. However, while we remain an EGC we are not required to include an attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm. To prepare for eventual compliance with Section 404, including the attestation report required once we no longer qualify as an EGC, we will be engaged in a process to document and evaluate our internal control over financial reporting, which is both costly and challenging. In this regard, we need to continue to dedicate internal resources, potentially engage outside consultants, adopt a detailed work plan to assess and document the adequacy of internal control over financial reporting, continue steps to improve control processes as appropriate, validate through testing that controls are functioning as documented, and implement a continuous reporting and improvement process for internal control over financial reporting.

As a result of the enhanced disclosure requirements of the U.S. securities laws, business and financial information that we report is broadly disseminated and highly visible to investors, which we believe may increase the likelihood of threatened or actual litigation, including by competitors and other third parties, which could, even if unsuccessful, divert financial resources and the attention of our management and key employees from our operations.

We may identify material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting. If we experience material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in the future or otherwise fail to maintain an effective system of internal controls, we may not be able to accurately or timely report our financial condition or results of operations, which may adversely affect our business.

While have previously identified and remediated material weaknesses, there can be no assurance that we will not identify additional control deficiencies or material weaknesses in the future.

In addition, if we identify new material weaknesses in the future, if we are unable to comply with the requirements of Section 404, in a timely manner, if we are unable to assert that our internal control over financial reporting is effective or if our independent registered public accounting firm is unable to express an opinion as to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting when required, the accuracy and timing of our financial reporting may be adversely affected, potentially resulting in restatements of our financial statements, we may be unable to maintain compliance with securities law requirements regarding timely filing of periodic reports and applicable Nasdaq listing requirements, investors may lose confidence in our financial reporting, and our share price may decline as a result.

We are an “emerging growth company,” and the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging growth companies may make our ADSs less attractive to investors.

We are an EGC as defined in the SEC’s rules and regulations and we will remain an EGC until the earlier to occur of (1) the last day of 2025, (2) the last day of the fiscal year in which we have total annual gross revenues of at least $1.235 billion, (3) the last day of the fiscal year in which we are deemed to be a “large accelerated filer” under SEC

rules, which means the market value of our equity securities that is held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of the prior June 30th, and (4) the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt during the prior three-year period. For so long as we remain an EGC, we are permitted and intend to rely on exemptions from certain disclosure requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not EGCs. These exemptions include:

We may choose to take advantage of some, but not all, of the available exemptions. We have taken advantage of reduced reporting burdens in this report. In particular, we have not included all of the executive compensation information that would be required if we were not an EGC. We cannot predict whether investors will find our ADSs less attractive if we rely on certain or all of these exemptions. If some investors find our ADSs less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our ADSs and our ADS price may be more volatile.

We qualify as a foreign private issuer and, as a result, we will not be subject to U.S. proxy rules and will be subject to Exchange Act reporting obligations that, to some extent, are more lenient and less frequent than those of a U.S. domestic public company.

We report under the Exchange Act as a non-U.S. company with foreign private issuer status. Because we qualify as a foreign private issuer under the Exchange Act, we are exempt from certain provisions of the Exchange Act that are applicable to U.S. domestic public companies, including (i) the sections of the Exchange Act regulating the solicitation of proxies, consents or authorizations in respect of a security registered under the Exchange Act; (ii) the sections of the Exchange Act requiring insiders to file public reports of their stock ownership and trading activities and liability for insiders who profit from trades made in a short period of time; and (iii) the rules under the Exchange Act requiring the filing with the SEC of quarterly reports on Form 10-Q containing unaudited financial and other specified information, or current reports on Form 8-K upon the occurrence of specified significant events. In addition, foreign private issuers are not required to file their annual report on Form 20-F until 120 days after the end of each fiscal year, while U.S. domestic issuers that are accelerated filers are required to file their annual report on Form 10-K within 75 days after the end of each fiscal year. Foreign private issuers also are exempt from Regulation Fair Disclosure, aimed at preventing issuers from making selective disclosures of material information. As a result of the above, you may not have the same protections afforded to shareholders of companies that are not foreign private issuers.

As a foreign private issuer, we are permitted to adopt certain home country practices in relation to corporate governance matters that differ significantly from Nasdaq corporate governance listing standards. These practices may afford less protection to shareholders than they would enjoy if we complied fully with Nasdaq corporate governance listing standards.

As a foreign private issuer listed on Nasdaq, we are subject to corporate governance listing standards. However, Nasdaq rules permit a foreign private issuer like us to follow the corporate governance practices of its home country in lieu of certain Nasdaq corporate governance listing standards. Certain corporate governance practices in England, which is our home country, may differ significantly from Nasdaq corporate governance listing standards. For example, neither the corporate laws of England nor our articles of association require a majority of our directors to be independent; we may include non-independent directors as members of our nominations and remuneration committees; and our independent directors are not required to hold regularly scheduled meetings at which only independent directors are present. Therefore, our shareholders may be afforded less protection than they otherwise

would have under Nasdaq corporate governance listing standards applicable to U.S. domestic issuers. See “Item 16.G. Corporate Governance” for the exemptions to the Nasdaq corporate governance rules applicable to foreign private issuers.

We expect to lose our foreign private issuer status in 2025, which will require us to comply with the Exchange Act’s domestic reporting regime and cause us to incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses.

As a foreign private issuer, we are not required to comply with all of the periodic disclosure and current reporting requirements of the Exchange Act applicable to U.S. domestic issuers. We do not expect to be a foreign private issuer as of June 30, 2024, which will require us to comply with all of the periodic disclosure and current reporting requirements of the Exchange Act applicable to U.S. domestic issuers as of January 1, 2025, which are more detailed and extensive than the requirements for foreign private issuers. We will have to prepare our financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”), resulting in financial statements that are different from our historical financial statements, which may make it more difficult for investors to compare our financial performance over time. We will be required to make changes in our corporate governance practices in accordance with various SEC and Nasdaq rules. The regulatory and compliance costs to us under U.S. securities laws may be significantly higher as a domestic reporting company; as a result, our legal and financial compliance costs will increase and may be more time consuming.

Holders of our ADSs have fewer rights than our shareholders and must act through the depositary to exercise their rights.

Holders of our ADSs do not have the same rights as our shareholders who hold our ordinary shares directly and may only exercise their voting rights with respect to the underlying ordinary shares in accordance with the provisions of the deposit agreement. Holders of the ADSs will appoint the depositary or its nominee as their representative to exercise the voting rights attaching to the ordinary shares represented by the ADSs. When a general meeting is convened, if you hold ADSs, you may not receive sufficient notice of a shareholders’ meeting to permit you to withdraw the ordinary shares underlying your ADSs to allow you to vote with respect to any specific matter. We will use commercially reasonable efforts to cause the depositary to extend voting rights to you in a timely manner, but we cannot assure you that you will receive voting materials in time to instruct the depositary to vote, and it is possible that you, or persons who hold their ADSs through brokers, dealers or other third parties, will not have the opportunity to exercise a right to vote. Furthermore, the depositary will not be liable for any failure to carry out any instructions to vote, for the manner in which any vote is cast or for the effect of any such vote. As a result, you may not be able to exercise your right to vote and you may lack recourse if your ADSs are not voted as you request. In addition, in your capacity as an ADS holder, you will not be able to call a shareholders’ meeting.

You may be subject to limitations on transfers of your ADSs.

Your ADSs are transferable on the books of the depositary. However, the depositary may close its transfer books at any time or from time to time when deemed necessary or advisable by it in good faith in connection with the performance of its duties or at our reasonable written request, subject in all cases to compliance with applicable U.S. securities laws. In addition, the depositary may refuse to deliver, transfer or register transfers of ADSs generally when our books or the books of the depositary are closed, or at any time if we or the depositary deems it advisable to do so because of any requirement of law or of any government or governmental body, or under any provision of the deposit agreement, or for any other reason, subject to certain rights to cancel ADSs and withdraw the underlying ordinary shares. Temporary delays in the cancellation of ADSs and withdrawal of the underlying ordinary shares may arise because the depositary has closed its transfer books or we have closed our transfer books, the transfer of ordinary shares is blocked to permit voting at a shareholders’ meeting, or because we are paying a dividend on our ordinary shares or similar corporate actions.

In addition, holders of ADSs may not be able to cancel their ADSs and withdraw the underlying ordinary shares when they owe money for fees, taxes and similar charges and when it is necessary to prohibit withdrawals in order to comply with any laws or governmental regulations that apply to the ADSs or to the withdrawal of our ordinary shares or other deposited securities.

The depositary for our ADSs is entitled to charge holders fees for various services, including annual service fees.

The depositary for our ADSs is entitled to charge holders fees for various services, including for the issuance of ADSs upon deposit of ordinary shares, cancellation of ADSs, distributions of cash dividends or other cash distributions, distributions of ADSs pursuant to share dividends or other free share distributions, distributions of securities other than ADSs and annual service fees. In the case of ADSs issued by the depositary into The Depository Trust Company, or DTC, the fees will be charged by the DTC participant to the account of the applicable beneficial owner in accordance with the procedures and practices of the DTC participant as in effect at the time. The depositary for our ADSs will not generally be responsible for any U.K. stamp duty or stamp duty reserve tax arising upon the issuance or transfer of ADSs.

The United Kingdom may impose a 1.5% stamp duty on our future issuances of ADSs.

Recently enacted U.K. legislation (the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023) provides for the revocation of EU laws and rights which, notwithstanding Brexit, currently remain effective in the U.K. Certain aspects of the stamp duty and stamp duty reserve tax treatment of our ordinary shares and ADSs are based on such EU laws and rights. Accordingly, unless steps are taken by the U.K. Government and/or parliament to preserve the current position (for example, by passing regulations under powers conferred by the legislation), then this could, in particular, result in a charge to stamp duty reserve tax, at the rate of 1.5% of the issue price, on the issuance of ADSs after December 31, 2023, which would represent an additional cost if we seek to raise further capital through the issuance of ADSs.

You may not receive distributions on our ordinary shares represented by the ADSs or any value for them if it is illegal or impractical to make them available to holders of ADSs.

Although we do not have any present plans to declare or pay any dividends, in the event we declare and pay any dividend, the depositary for the ADSs has agreed to pay to you the cash dividends or other distributions it or the custodian receives on our ordinary shares or other deposited securities after deducting its fees and expenses, or withholding of taxes. You will receive these distributions in proportion to the number of our ordinary shares your ADSs represent. However, in accordance with the limitations set forth in the deposit agreement, it may be unlawful or impractical to make a distribution available to holders of ADSs. We have no obligation to register under U.S. securities laws any offering of ADSs, ordinary shares or other securities received through such distributions. We also have no obligation to take any other action to permit distribution on the ADSs, ordinary shares, rights or anything else to holders of the ADSs. This means that you may not receive the distributions we make on our ordinary shares or any value from them if it is unlawful or impractical to make them available to you. These restrictions may have an adverse effect on the value of your ADSs.

Your right to participate in any future rights offerings may be limited, which may cause dilution to your holdings.

Under English law, shareholders usually have preemptive rights to subscribe on a pro rata basis in the issuance of new shares for cash. The exercise of preemptive rights by certain shareholders not resident in the United Kingdom may be restricted by applicable law or practice in the United Kingdom and overseas jurisdictions. We may from time to time distribute rights to our shareholders, including rights to acquire our securities. However, we cannot make rights available to you in the United States unless we register the rights and the securities to which the rights relate under the Securities Act or an exemption from the registration requirements is available. Also, under the deposit agreement, the depositary bank will not make rights available to you unless either both the rights and any related securities are registered under the Securities Act, or the distribution of them to ADS holders is exempted from registration under the Securities Act. We are under no obligation to file a registration statement with respect to any such rights or securities or to endeavor to cause such a registration statement to be declared effective. Moreover, we may not be able to establish an exemption from registration under the Securities Act. If the depositary does not distribute the rights, it may, under the deposit agreement, either sell them, if possible, or allow them to lapse. Accordingly, you may be unable to participate in our rights offerings and may experience dilution in your holdings. We are also permitted under English law to disapply preemptive rights (subject to the approval of our shareholders by special resolution or the inclusion in

our articles of association of a power to disapply such rights) and thereby exclude certain shareholders, such as overseas shareholders, from participating in a rights offering (usually to avoid a breach of local securities laws).

If we are a passive foreign investment company, there could be adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences to U.S. Holders.

Under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, we will be a passive foreign investment company, or PFIC, for any taxable year in which (i) 75% or more of our gross income consists of passive income, or (ii) 50% or more of the average quarterly value of our assets consists of assets that produce, or are held for the production of, passive income (including cash). For purposes of these tests, passive income includes dividends, interest, gains from the sale or exchange of investment property and certain rents and royalties. In addition, for purposes of the above calculations, a non-U.S. corporation that directly or indirectly owns at least 25% by value of the shares of another corporation is treated as if it held its proportionate share of the assets and received directly its proportionate share of the income of such other corporation. If we are a PFIC for any taxable year during which a U.S. Holder (as defined below under “Item 10.E. Taxation—Material U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations for U.S. Holders”) holds our ADSs, the U.S. Holder may be subject to adverse tax consequences regardless of whether we continue to qualify as a PFIC, including ineligibility for any preferred tax rates on capital gains or on actual or deemed dividends, interest charges on certain taxes treated as deferred, and additional reporting requirements.

Based on estimates of our income and assets, and certain assumptions with respect to the characterization of our assets as active or passive, we do not believe we were a PFIC for our taxable year ended December 31, 2023. However, no assurances regarding our PFIC status can be provided for any past, current or future taxable year. The determination of whether we are a PFIC is a fact-intensive determination made on an annual basis and the applicable law is subject to varying interpretation. Accordingly, our U.S. counsel expresses no opinion with respect to our PFIC status for any prior, current or future taxable year.

For further discussion of the PFIC rules and the adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences in the event we are classified as a PFIC, see the section titled “Taxation—Material U.S. Federal Income Considerations for U.S. Holders.”

If a United States person is treated as owning at least 10% of our ordinary shares, such United States person may be subject to adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences.

For U.S. federal income tax purposes, if a United States person is treated as owning (directly, indirectly or constructively) 10% or more of our stock by vote or value, such U.S. holder will be treated as a “United States shareholder” with respect to each “controlled foreign corporation” in our group (if any). Because our group includes at least one U.S. subsidiary, our non-U.S. subsidiaries and any non-U.S. subsidiaries we were to form or acquire in the future will be treated as controlled foreign corporations.

A United States shareholder of a controlled foreign corporation will be required to annually report and include in its U.S. federal taxable income its pro rata share of “subpart F income,” “global intangible low-taxed income” and investments in U.S. property by the controlled foreign corporations, regardless of whether we make any distributions of such income. Special rules, however, apply to United States persons that are partnerships or other pass-through entities. Certain deductions and credits for foreign income taxes paid or accrued by the controlled foreign corporation may be allowed to a corporate United States shareholder, but will not be allowed to an individual United States shareholder. We cannot provide any assurance that we will furnish to any United States shareholder the information required to comply with the reporting and tax-paying obligations discussed applicable to a United States shareholder in respect of controlled foreign corporations. Failure to comply with such reporting obligations may subject a holder of our ordinary shares that is a United States shareholder to significant monetary penalties and may prevent the statute of limitations with respect to its U.S. federal income tax return for the year for which reporting was due from starting. Holders of our ordinary shares that are United States persons should consult their tax advisors regarding the potential application of these rules to their investment in our ordinary shares.

We may be unable to use U.K. carryforward tax losses to reduce future tax payments or benefit from favorable U.K. tax legislation.

As a U.K. resident trading entity, we are subject to U.K. corporate taxation. Due to the nature of our business, we have generated losses since inception. As of December 31, 2023, we had cumulative carryforward tax losses of £155.8 million. Subject to any relevant restrictions (including those that limit the percentage of profits that can be reduced by carried forward losses and those that can restrict the use of carried forward losses where there is a change of ownership of more than half the ordinary shares of the company and a major change in the nature, conduct or scale of the trade), we expect these to be available to carry forward and offset against future operating profits.

As a company that carries out extensive research and development, or R&D, activities, we seek to benefit from the U.K. R&D tax relief programs, being the Small and Medium-sized Enterprises R&D tax relief program, or SME Program, and, for certain specific categories of expenditure, the Research and Development Expenditure Credit program, or RDEC Program. The SME Program may be particularly beneficial to us, as under such program the trading losses that arise from our qualifying R&D activities can be surrendered for a cash rebate of up to 33.35% of qualifying expenditure incurred prior to April 1, 2023, and up to 18.6% of qualifying expenditure incurred thereafter. Amendments to the U.K. R&D tax credit regime that are contained in the Finance Bill currently proceeding through the U.K. Parliament will increase the cash rebate that may be claimed from such date to 26.97% of qualifying expenditure, if we qualify as an “R&D-intensive SME” for an accounting period (broadly, a loss making SME whose qualifying R&D expenditure represents 40% (or, from April 1, 2024, 30%) or more of its total expenditure for that accounting period). These amendments will also with effect from April 1, 2024 (i) (unless limited exceptions apply) introduce restrictions on the tax relief that can be claimed for expenditure incurred on sub-contracted R&D activities or externally provided workers, where such sub-contracted activities are not carried out in the U.K. or such workers are not subject to U.K. payroll taxes, and (ii) merge the SME Program and the RDEC Program into a single scheme. If such proposals are implemented as currently provided in the Finance Bill, and we do not qualify as an R&D-intensive SME, we will either cease to be able to claim cash rebates in respect of our R&D activities, or only be able to receive such cash rebates at a significantly lower rate than at present. These and other potential future changes to the U.K. R&D tax relief programs may mean we no longer qualify or have a material impact on the extent to which we can make claims or benefit from them.

In the event we generate revenues in the future, we may benefit from the U.K. “patent box” regime that allows profits attributable to revenues from patents or patented products to be taxed at an effective rate of 10%. As of December 31, 2023, we own 18 patent families with each family creating rights in current or future patent applications which, if issued, would cover our product candidates, and accordingly, future upfront fees, milestone fees, product revenues and royalties could be taxed at this tax rate. When taken in combination with the enhanced relief available on our research and development expenditures, we expect a long-term lower effective rate of corporation tax to apply to us. If, however, there are unexpected adverse changes to the U.K. research and development tax credit regime or the “patent box” regime, or for any reason we are unable to qualify for such advantageous tax legislation, or we are unable to use net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards and certain built-in losses to reduce future tax payments, our business, results of operations, and financial condition may be adversely affected. This may impact our ongoing requirement for investment and the timeframes within which additional investment is required.

Changes and uncertainties in the tax system in the countries in which we have operations, could materially adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations, and reduce net returns to our shareholders.

We conduct business in the United Kingdom, Germany and the United States and file income tax returns in multiple jurisdictions. Our consolidated effective income tax rate could be materially adversely affected by several factors, including: changing tax laws, regulations and treaties, or the interpretation thereof; tax policy initiatives and reforms under consideration (such as those related to the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development’s, or OECD, Base Erosion and Profit Shifting, or BEPS, Project, the European Commission’s state aid investigations and other initiatives); the practices of tax authorities in jurisdictions in which we operate; the resolution of issues arising from tax audits or examinations and any related interest or penalties. Such changes may include (but are not limited to) the taxation of operating income, investment income, dividends received or (in the specific context of withholding tax) dividends paid.

Tax authorities may disagree with our positions and conclusions regarding certain tax positions, or may apply existing rules in an unforeseen manner, resulting in unanticipated costs, taxes or non-realization of expected benefits.

A tax authority may disagree with tax positions that we have taken, which could result in increased tax liabilities. For example, His Majesty’s Revenue & Customs, or HMRC, the U.S. Internal Revenue Service or another tax authority could challenge our allocation of income by tax jurisdiction and the amounts paid between our affiliated companies pursuant to our intercompany arrangements and transfer pricing policies, including amounts paid with respect to our intellectual property development. Similarly, a tax authority could assert that we are subject to tax in a jurisdiction where we believe we have not established a taxable connection, often referred to as a “permanent establishment” under international tax treaties, and such an assertion, if successful, could increase our expected tax liability in one or more jurisdictions.

A tax authority may take the position that material income tax liabilities, interest and penalties are payable by us, for example where there has been a technical violation of contradictory laws and regulations that are relatively new and have not been subject to extensive review or interpretation, in which case we expect that we might contest such assessment. High-profile companies can be particularly vulnerable to aggressive application of unclear requirements. Many companies must negotiate their tax bills with tax inspectors who may demand higher taxes than applicable law appears to provide. Contesting such an assessment may be a lengthy and costly process and if we were unsuccessful in disputing the assessment, the implications could increase our anticipated effective tax rate, where applicable.

Protections found in provisions under the U.K. City Code on Takeovers and Mergers, or the Takeover Code, may delay or discourage a takeover attempt, including attempts that may be beneficial to holders of our ADSs.

The Takeover Code applies to an offer for a public company whose securities have been admitted to trading on a multilateral trading facility in the United Kingdom which includes AIM, at any time during the 10 years prior to the relevant date of an offer, provided that (i) the registered office of the company is in the United Kingdom and (ii) the company is considered by the Panel on Takeovers and Mergers, or the Takeover Panel, to have its place of central management and control in the United Kingdom. The way in which the test for central management and control is applied for the purposes of the Takeover Code may be different from the way in which it is applied by the U.K. tax authorities. Under the Takeover Code, the Takeover Panel looks to where the majority of the directors are resident, among other factors, for the purposes of determining where a company has its place of central management and control.

The Takeover Panel has confirmed that based on the current composition of our board, the Takeover Code will continue to apply to us. However, the Takeover Code could cease to apply in the future if any changes to the board composition result in the majority of the directors not being resident in the United Kingdom, Channel Islands and Isle of Man. Our articles of association have been amended to include certain important protections which would apply in the event that the Takeover Code ceases to apply.

The Takeover Code provides a framework within which takeovers of certain companies organized in the United Kingdom are regulated and conducted. The following is a brief summary of some of the most important rules of the Takeover Code:

The rights of our shareholders may differ from the rights typically offered to shareholders of a U.S. corporation.

We are incorporated under English law. The rights of holders of ordinary shares and, therefore, certain of the rights of holders of our ADSs, are governed by English law, including the provisions of the U.K. Companies Act 2006, or the Companies Act, and by our articles of association. These rights differ in certain respects from the rights of shareholders in typical U.S. corporations. See “Description of Share Capital and Articles of Association—Differences in Corporate Law” filed as Exhibit 2.3 to this report for a description of the principal differences between the

provisions of the Companies Act applicable to us and, for example, the Delaware General Corporation Law relating to shareholders’ rights and protections.

As an English company, certain capital structure decisions will require shareholder approval, which may limit our flexibility to manage our capital structure.

English law provides that a board of directors may only allot shares (or grant rights to subscribe for, or to convert any security into, shares) with the prior authorization of shareholders by ordinary resolution, being a resolution passed by a simple majority of votes cast, such authorization stating the aggregate nominal amount of shares that it covers and being valid for a maximum period of five years, each as specified in the articles of association or relevant shareholder resolution. In either case, this authorization would need to be renewed by our shareholders upon expiration (i.e., at least every five years). At the annual general meeting of shareholders held on April 27, 2023, we obtained authority from our shareholders to allot new shares or to grant rights to subscribe for or to convert any security into shares in the company up to a maximum aggregate nominal amount of £5,402,633.25 for a period of five years from the date of such annual general meeting of shareholders, which authorization will need to be renewed upon expiration (i.e., at least every five years) but may be sought more frequently for additional five-year terms (or any shorter period).

English law also generally provides shareholders with preemptive rights when new shares are issued for cash. However, it is possible for the articles of association, or for shareholders to pass a special resolution at a general meeting, being a resolution passed by at least 75% of the votes cast, to disapply preemptive rights. Such a disapplication of preemptive rights may be for a maximum period of up to five years from the date of adoption of the articles of association, if the disapplication is contained in the articles of association, or from the date of the shareholder special resolution, if the disapplication is by shareholder special resolution, but not longer than the duration of the authority to allot shares to which the disapplication relates. In either case, this disapplication would need to be renewed by our shareholders upon its expiration (i.e., at least every five years). At the annual general meeting of shareholders held on April 27, 2023, we obtained authority from our shareholders to disapply preemptive rights in connection with the allotment of equity securities up to a maximum aggregate nominal amount of £5,402,633.25 for a period of five years from the date of such annual general meeting of shareholders which disapplication will need to be renewed upon expiration (i.e., at least every five years), but may be sought more frequently for additional five year terms (or any shorter period).

English law also generally prohibits a public company from repurchasing its own shares without the prior approval of shareholders by ordinary resolution, being a resolution passed by a simple majority of votes cast, and other formalities. Such approval may be for a maximum period of up to five years. See “Description of Share Capital and Articles of Association” filed as Exhibit 2.3 to this report.

Claims of U.S. civil liabilities may not be enforceable against us.

We are incorporated under English law. Substantially all of our assets are located outside the United States. As a result, it may not be possible for investors to effect service of process within the United States upon such persons or to enforce judgments obtained in U.S. courts against them or us, including judgments predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the U.S. federal securities laws.

The United States and the United Kingdom do not currently have a treaty providing for the reciprocal recognition and enforcement of judgments (other than arbitration awards) in civil and commercial matters. Consequently, a final judgment for payment given by a court in the United States, whether or not predicated solely upon U.S. securities laws, would not automatically be recognized or enforceable in England and Wales. In addition, uncertainty exists as to whether the English and Welsh courts would entertain original actions brought in England and Wales against us or our directors or senior management predicated upon the securities laws of the United States or any state in the United States. Any final and conclusive monetary judgment for a definite sum obtained against us in U.S. courts would be treated by the courts of England and Wales as a cause of action in itself and sued upon as a debt so that no retrial of the issues would be necessary, provided that certain requirements are met consistent with English law and public policy. Whether these requirements are met in respect of a judgment based upon the civil liability provisions of the U.S. securities laws is an issue for the English court making such decision. If an English court gives judgment for the sum payable under a U.S. judgment, the English judgment will be enforceable by methods generally available for this purpose.

As a result, U.S. investors may not be able to enforce against us or our senior management, board of directors or certain experts named herein who are residents of the United Kingdom or countries other than the United States any judgments obtained in U.S. courts in civil and commercial matters, including judgments under the U.S. federal securities laws.

Our articles of association provide that the U.S. federal district courts are the exclusive forum for the resolution of any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act.

Our articles of association provide that the U.S. federal district courts are the exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act. However, the enforceability of similar federal court choice of forum provisions has been challenged in legal proceedings in the United States, and it is possible that a court could find this type of provision to be inapplicable, unenforceable, or inconsistent with other documents that are relevant to the filing of such lawsuits. In addition, the Securities Act provides that both federal and state courts have jurisdiction over suits brought to enforce any duty or liability under the Securities Act or the rules and regulations thereunder. Accepting or consent to this forum selection provision does not constitute a waiver by you of compliance with federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder. You may not waive compliance with federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder. If a court were to find the choice of forum provision contained in our articles of association to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition. This choice of forum provision may limit a shareholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or other employees, which may discourage such lawsuits.

ADS holders may not be entitled to a jury trial with respect to claims arising under the deposit agreement, which could result in less favorable results to the plaintiff(s) in any such action.

The deposit agreement governing our ADSs provides that owners and holders of ADSs irrevocably waive the right to a trial by jury in any legal proceeding arising out of or relating to the deposit agreement or the ADSs, including claims under U.S. federal securities laws, against us or the depositary to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law. If this jury trial waiver provision is prohibited by applicable law, an action could nevertheless proceed under the terms of the deposit agreement with a jury trial. Although we are not aware of a specific federal decision that addresses the enforceability of a jury trial waiver in the context of U.S. federal securities laws, it is our understanding that jury trial waivers are generally enforceable. Moreover, insofar as the deposit agreement is governed by the laws of the State of New York, New York laws similarly recognize the validity of jury trial waivers in appropriate circumstances. In determining whether to enforce a jury trial waiver provision, New York courts and federal courts will consider whether the visibility of the jury trial waiver provision within the agreement is sufficiently prominent such that a party has knowingly waived any right to trial by jury. We believe that this is the case with respect to the deposit agreement and the ADSs.

In addition, New York courts will not enforce a jury trial waiver provision in order to bar a viable setoff or counterclaim of fraud or one which is based upon a creditor’s negligence in failing to liquidate collateral upon a guarantor’s demand, or in the case of an intentional tort claim (as opposed to a contract dispute). No condition, stipulation or provision of the deposit agreement or ADSs serves as a waiver by any holder or beneficial owner of ADSs or by us or the depositary of compliance with any provision of U.S. federal securities laws and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder.

If any owner or holder of our ADSs brings a claim against us or the depositary in connection with matters arising under the deposit agreement or the ADSs, including claims under U.S. federal securities laws, such owner or holder may not be entitled to a jury trial with respect to such claims, which may have the effect of limiting and discouraging lawsuits against us or the depositary. If a lawsuit is brought against us or the depositary under the deposit agreement, it may be heard only by a judge or justice of the applicable trial court, which would be conducted according to different civil procedures and may result in different results than a trial by jury would have had, including results that could be less favorable to the plaintiff(s) in any such action, depending on, among other things, the nature of the claims, the judge or justice hearing such claims, and the venue of the hearing.

ITEM 4: INFORMATION ON THE COMPANY

A. History and Development of the Company.

We were incorporated as a public limited company under the laws of England and Wales on November 18, 1994 under the name Stanford Rook Holdings plc with company number 2992058. In July 2005, we acquired Atugen AG, a company specializing in siRNA. On April 26, 2007, we changed our name to Silence Therapeutics plc. Our principal executive offices are located at 72 Hammersmith Road, London W14 8TH, United Kingdom and our telephone number is +44 (0)20-3457-6900. Our registered office address is 27 Eastcastle Street, London, W1W 8DH, United Kingdom. Our ADSs were listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market under the symbol “SLN” in September 2020. In June 2021, we moved our Nasdaq listing from the Nasdaq Capital Market tier to the Nasdaq Global Market tier. The SEC maintains a website at www.sec.gov which contains in electronic form each of the reports and other information that we have filed electronically with the SEC. Our website address is www.silence-therapeutics.com. Our agent for service of process in the United States is Harvard Business Services, Inc., 16192 Coastal Hwy, Lewes, Delaware 19958, USA.

Capital Expenditures

Our capital expenditures for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022, and 2021 were £0.1 million, £0.4 million, and £1.3 million, respectively. These capital expenditures consisted primarily of lab and computer equipment.

B. Business Overview

We are a biotechnology company focused on discovering and developing novel molecules incorporating short interfering ribonucleic acid, or siRNA, to inhibit the expression of specific target genes thought to play a role in the pathology of diseases with significant unmet medical need. Our siRNA molecules are designed to harness the body’s natural mechanism of RNAi by specifically binding to and degrading messenger RNA, or mRNA, molecules that encode specific targeted disease-associated proteins in a cell. By degrading the message that encodes the disease-associated protein, the production of that protein is reduced and its level of activity is lowered. In the field of RNAi therapeutics, this reduction of disease-associated protein production and activity is referred to as “gene silencing.” Our proprietary mRNAi GOLD™ (GalNAc Oligonucleotide Discovery) platform consists of precision engineered product candidates designed to accurately target and ‘silence’ specific disease-associated genes in the liver. Using our mRNAi GOLD™ platform, we have generated siRNA product candidates both for our internal development pipeline as well as for out-licensed programs with third-party collaborators. Our wholly owned pipeline is currently focused in three therapeutic areas of high unmet need: cardiovascular disease, hematology and rare diseases.

Zerlasiran (SLN360) is our wholly owned siRNA designed to lower the body's production of apolipoprotein(a), a key component of lipoprotein(a), or Lp(a), that has been associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events. High Lp(a) is a genetically determined cardiovascular risk factor affecting up to 20% of the world’s population and is associated with a high risk of heart attack, stroke and aortic stenosis. There are currently no approved medicines that selectively lower Lp(a). In February 2022, we reported positive results from the single-ascending dose portion of the APOLLO phase 1 program evaluating zerlasiran in 32 healthy adults with high Lp(a) ≥150 nmol/L. In the single dose trial, participants in the top two zerlasiran single dose groups (300 mg and 600 mg) were observed to have experienced up to a 96% and 98% median reduction in Lp(a) levels, respectively, and median reductions of up to 71% and 81% from baseline persisted at 150 days. Further analysis showed median time-averaged Lp(a) reductions over 150 days exceeded 80% in the zerlasiran 300 mg and 600 mg dose groups. At day 365, some participants still exhibited substantial knockdown of Lp(a) to approximately 50% of baseline. Zerlasiran was well tolerated with no serious safety concerns reported. In November 2023, we reported positive topline results from the multiple dose portion of the APOLLO program in 36 adults with baseline Lp(a) levels ≥150 nmol/L and stable atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). In the multiple dose trial, zerlasiran (200 mg, 300 mg and 450 mg) was administered twice subcutaneously at two different dosing intervals. Data demonstrated a significant reduction from baseline in Lp(a) of up to 99% at 90 days following injection of repeated doses. Lp(a) levels remained approximately 90% lower than baseline at 201 days (end of treatment period) at the two highest doses. A dose dependent reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL cholesterol) and apolipoprotein B (ApoB) was also observed. Zerlasiran was well tolerated; no clinically important safety concerns were identified. Zerlasiran is currently being evaluated in the fully enrolled ALPACAR-360 phase 2 study in patients with Lp(a) levels 125 nmol/L at high risk of ASCVD events. We expect to report topline 36-week data in the first quarter of 2024 (primary endpoint) and topline 48-week data in the

second quarter of 2024. We are currently finalizing the design of our phase 3 Clinical Outcomes Trial. We continue to engage in global partnership discussions for future zerlasiran development and for potential future commercialization.

Divesiran (SLN124) is our wholly owned siRNA designed to inhibit TMPRSS6 expression in the liver to raise hepcidin, a peptide hormone that is the master regulator of systemic iron balance. Divesiran has shown preclinical potential in several hematological disorders. Furthermore, divesiran has demonstrated proof of mechanism in the GEMINI phase 1 trial in healthy volunteers completed in May 2021. In the GEMINI study, divesiran was observed to increase average hepcidin approximately four-fold and reduce serum iron by approximately 50% after a single dose with effects persisting for at least two months. Data were presented at the American Society of Hematology (ASH) 2021 Annual Meeting and published in the American Journal of Hematology in July 2023. Divesiran is currently being studied in the SANRECO phase 1/2 trial in patients with polycythemia vera (PV). Divesiran has FDA Fast Track and orphan disease designations for PV. We plan to report data from the phase 1 portion of the study in the first half of 2024.

The potential of our mRNAi GOLD™ platform has been validated through ongoing research and development collaborations with leading pharmaceutical companies, such as AstraZeneca, Mallinckrodt and Hansoh. These collaborations collectively represent up to 14 pipeline programs and approximately $5.5 billion in potential milestones plus royalties.

We believe the potential for our mRNAi GOLD™ platform to address disease-associated genes in the liver is substantial. Only around one percent of the approximately 14,000 liver expressed genes have been targeted by publicly known siRNAs. Once in the clinic, early-stage GalNAC-conjugated RNAi programs have shown a much greater likelihood of advancement from the current phase of development compared to the pharmaceutical industry average. We aim to maximize our mRNAi GOLD™ platform by advancing both our proprietary and partnered pipelines.

Background on siRNA Molecules and RNA Interference

Messenger RNA (mRNA) plays an essential role in the process used by cells to translate genetic information from DNA to create proteins. Transcription from DNA in the cell nucleus generates different types of RNA, including mRNA, which carries in the sequence of its nucleotides the genetic information which serves as molecular blueprints required for translation, or protein synthesis, outside of the nucleus where proteins are made. In some cases, cells produce mRNA erroneously, resulting in synthesis of too much of a particular protein or a mutated protein variant, which can lead to disease. Our siRNAs are designed to bind to undesirable mRNA, whereupon a natural process known as RNA interference, or RNAi, is triggered, resulting in catalytic degradation of the mRNA and reduced production and activity of the disease-associated protein.

RNAi is a naturally occurring biological pathway within cells for sequence-specific silencing and regulation of gene expression. RNAi was discovered by Andrew Fire and Craig Mello, for which they were awarded the 2006 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. RNAi therapeutics represent a novel advance in drug development that has the potential to transform the care of patients with genetic and other diseases. Historically, the pharmaceutical industry had developed only small molecules or recombinant proteins to inhibit the activity of disease-associated proteins. While this approach is effective for many diseases, a number of proteins cannot be inhibited by either small molecules or recombinant proteins. Some proteins lack the binding pockets small molecules require for interaction. Other proteins are solely intracellular and are therefore inaccessible to recombinant protein-based therapeutics, which are limited to cell surface and extracellular proteins. The unique advantage of RNAi is that, instead of targeting proteins, RNAi silences the expression of genes themselves via the targeted destruction of the mRNAs made from the gene. Rather than seeking to inhibit a protein directly, the RNAi approach works upstream to prevent its creation in the first place.

Once inside a cell, siRNA molecules are recognized by the endogenous RNAi cellular machinery, which removes one of the strands, referred to as a passenger strand, of the siRNA construct, thereby allowing the other strand, referred to as a guide strand, to find its target mRNA and bind to it through Watson-Crick base pairing. This site-specific binding triggers the biological process of RNAi interference, by which natural cellular machinery degrades target mRNA bound by the guide strand and thereby prevents it from being translated into functional proteins.

Our medicines are designed to harness this natural pathway to develop a new generation of therapeutics by designing tailored siRNA sequences that are able to bind through Watson-Crick base pairing to mRNAs that code for specific disease-associated genes, or genes that regulate them. Our siRNA molecules are administered by subcutaneous injection. Once administered, our siRNA molecules are taken up specifically by target liver cells or cleared from the body within hours. A single siRNA molecule, once in the liver and incorporated into the RNAi cellular machinery, can degrade large numbers of targeted mRNAs due to the catalytic nature of the cell’s RNAi machinery. Because the catalytic activity of the RNAi pathway eventually fades with gradual degradation of the guide strands, RNAi-mediated protein reduction is not permanent. In our preclinical studies, we have observed a durable, dose-dependent silencing effect with our product candidates, with the highest dose resulting in reductions of between 50% and 85% or more of the target protein level over the course of several weeks to months following subcutaneous injection. As a result of the phase 1 clinical data we have generated in both our zerlasiran and divesiran programs, we believe that these observed results suggest that our product candidates could lead to similar results in humans. The graphic below shows the steps involved in the pairing of our siRNA molecules with the bases contained in the mRNA sequence for a particular target gene.

We believe that siRNA molecules can, in theory, be engineered to bind specifically to and silence almost any gene in the human genome to which siRNA can be delivered. This potentially broad application of siRNA therapeutics could allow them to become a new major class of drugs. We are currently able to deliver siRNA molecules to liver cells using GalNAc for receptor-mediated targeting. GalNAc is an amino-modified monosaccharide that binds to asialoglycoprotein receptors, or ASGPRs, with high affinity and specificity. When GalNAc-conjugated siRNA molecules reach the surface of liver cells, they are internalized in those cells, with those not internalized being excreted. Once internalized, the siRNAs specifically bind to their target mRNAs, degrading them through the cell’s natural RNAi pathway. This GalNAc-siRNA drug modality is intended to enable precision medicine through the accuracy of Watson-Crick base pairing of the siRNA to its target gene mRNA, coupled with the specificity of GalNAc-mediated delivery to the target gene-containing liver cell.

Our mRNAi GOLD™ platform uses a novel structure of double-stranded RNA with chemical modifications designed to improve the stability and efficacy of our siRNA molecules as well as to enhance delivery to targeted liver cells. We incorporate proprietary chemical modifications to enhance drug properties of our siRNA molecules, such as potency, stability and tissue distribution. We believe this approach results in a powerful modular technology that will be well-suited to tackle life-changing diseases. Particular siRNA molecules are designed to reduce the levels of a disease-associated protein directly, such as in the case of zerlasiran. In preclinical studies and our phase 1 single-ascending dose study, zerlasiran was shown to directly reduce Lp(a) expression. Alternatively, in cases in which a disease-associated protein is normally subject to inhibition by a regulatory protein, siRNA molecules are designed to increase the levels of the disease-associated protein by silencing the inhibitory protein, thereby relieving inhibition and indirectly increasing levels of the protein normally subject to inhibition. In preclinical studies and in a phase 1 clinical trial in healthy volunteers, divesiran was shown to indirectly up-regulate hepcidin levels by reducing the expression of a specific gene, TMPRSS6, which normally inhibits the production of hepcidin. We will use this approach to address ‘iron loading’ anemia conditions in which hepcidin expression is typically low. Using these techniques, we believe we can design siRNA molecules to decrease high protein levels, and in some cases, to increase low protein levels, depending on the particular disease genes being targeted.

Our mRNAi GOLD™ Platform

Our mRNAi GOLD™ platform comprises elements of our GalNAc-siRNA toolbox, our liver cell targeting technology and our target selection and screening process.

GalNAc-siRNA Toolbox. Our mRNAi GOLD™ platform is a toolbox comprising several different elements that can be incorporated into our double-stranded siRNA structure, known as blunt-ended 19-mers, either singly or in different combinations depending on individual siRNA sequences. The toolbox elements include:

When applying these elements of our toolbox, we also aim to reduce the overall content of the sugar modifications and the number of undefined stereogenic centers in the siRNA molecule.

Liver Cell Targeting Technology. Blood flow and fenestra, or small openings in the endothelium, result in a large amount of the injected dose of a conjugated siRNA passing through the liver and reaching the main cell type of the liver known as a hepatocyte. Hepatocytes are cuboidal epithelial cells that line the liver sinusoids. Individual hepatocytes have approximately 0.5 to 1.0 million cell surface ASGPRs. GalNAc binds to ASGPRs with high affinity so that when GalNAc-conjugated siRNA reaches the hepatocytes, they are internalized into the cells where siRNA can bind and, as a result, can degrade the target mRNA, which in turn reduces production of the encoded protein and that protein’s activity, thereby silencing the respective gene. Only a small fraction of the initial dose reaches the hepatocyte and the right compartment of the cell, but once the siRNA is there, it can stay active and intact for several months, allowing a small number of internalized siRNA molecules to exert a potent effect on the target mRNA. We apply the toolbox elements in the lead optimization phase to identify candidates that we believe will be potent with a long duration of action and have a favorable safety profile.

Target Selection and Screening Process. We are able to source potential product candidates through a proprietary target selection process. The selection of new targets involves a careful analysis of human genetics evidence, the biology underlying an indication, disease epidemiology and addressable population, the current standard of care and resulting medical need, the commercial landscape and the envisaged clinical path.

Our screening process relies on a proprietary in silico algorithm that seeks to predict the most efficacious and specific siRNAs for any given target. This bioinformatics function is designed to continuously improve in silico predictions for finding potentially potent and safe siRNA sequences. The highest scoring drug candidates subsequently undergo a multi-step evaluation process involving several rounds of in vitro screening in cell lines and primary

hepatocytes to identify the most potent molecules. Top candidates identified in vitro are then tested for safety and potential efficacy in animal models. At this point in the process, additional modification patterns and new chemistries are introduced for improvement of activity and duration of action while maintaining the desired safety profile. To be selected as a drug candidate for clinical trials, it further needs to be shown that a molecule is well tolerated, elicits no serious adverse effects, and achieves strong and long-lasting knockdown of the targeted gene in a study with non-human primates.

Our Pipeline

Our pipeline is centered around our liver-targeting mRNAi GOLD™ platform and consists of a diversified set of therapeutic areas, including cardiovascular disease, hematology and rare diseases.

*Silence retains exclusive rights to this program outside of the China region, which includes Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan.

Our siRNA Product Candidates

Zerlasiran (SLN360)

Overview

Zerlasiran is an siRNA molecule designed for the treatment of cardiovascular disease associated with elevated Lp(a), a lipoprotein in the blood. Available human data validate Lp(a) as an independent risk factor increasing the chances of developing premature cardiovascular diseases, including coronary heart disease and unstable angina, as well as myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke. Zerlasiran is administered by subcutaneous injection and has the potential to reduce these diseases by specifically binding to and inducing RNAi-mediated degradation of the mRNAs made from LPA, the gene that encodes apolipoprotein(a), a protein specifically found in Lp(a). Zerlasiran’s mode of action creates an opportunity to develop this product candidate for several indications for which Lp(a) has been shown to be a causal, independent risk factor.

Elevated levels of Lp(a) ≥ 125 nmol/L or approximately 50mg/dL are considered to affect up to 20% of the world’s population. The incidence of elevated Lp(a) is thought to be higher in people with established cardiovascular disease and calcific aortic valvular stenosis. Additionally, elevated Lp(a) concentrations are associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke, particularly in stroke patients 55 years of age and younger. There is a genetic link between plasma Lp(a) level and cardiovascular risk. Mutations that genetically cause elevated Lp(a) levels have been linked with increases in myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, carotid stenosis, peripheral arterial disease (including femoral artery stenosis), abdominal aortic aneurysm, obstructed coronary vessels (i.e. coronary atherosclerotic burden), earlier onset of coronary artery disease, cardiovascular and all-cause mortality, increased risk of heart failure and reduced longevity. Importantly, these causal relationships are independent of concentrations of other lipids and lipoproteins, including low-density lipoprotein, or LDL, and conventional cardiovascular disease risk factors. Conversely, a genetically determined decrease in Lp(a) has been associated with a 29% lower risk of coronary artery disease, 31% lower risk of peripheral vascular disease, 17% lower risk of heart failure, 13% lower risk of stroke and a 37% lower risk of aortic stenosis.

In the APOLLO phase 1 program evaluating healthy adults and ASCVD patients with high Lp(a) levels ≥ 150 nmol/L, zerlasiran was well tolerated and observed to significantly reduce Lp(a) levels up to 99% with strong durability. Zerlasiran is currently being evaluated in the ALPACAR-360 phase 2 clinical trial in subjects with high Lp(a) ≥ 125 nmol/L at high risk of ASCVD events.

Disadvantages of existing treatment options

Lp(a) is not susceptible to lifestyle changes and there are no currently available pharmacological treatments that cause an appreciable reduction in Lp(a). The only existing treatment to reduce Lp(a) is apheresis, which involves the removal of blood plasma from the body by the withdrawal of blood, its separation into plasma and cells, and the reintroduction of the cells, used especially to remove antibodies in treating autoimmune diseases. This process can take between two and four hours and is performed every one to two weeks. Consequently, it is invasive and burdensome for patients, and it is only available at limited centers at a high cost. Apheresis is primarily used in Europe and it is not incorporated in the treatment guidelines in the United States.

There are currently no approved lipid-lowering agents specific to Lp(a). Several non-specific agents, largely targeting LDL cholesterol, have been observed to have only marginal or modest Lp(a) reductions, including ezetimibe (7%), niacin therapy (23%), cholesteryl ester transfer protein, or CETP, inhibitors (25-60%), and antisense oligonucleotide-mediated inhibition of apolipoprotein B (ApoB) by mipomersen (26%). Additionally, two monoclonal antibodies that inhibit proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9, or PCSK9, have been observed to reduce Lp(a) levels by 20%-30%. However, randomization studies have suggested that to produce a clinically significant reduction in cardiovascular risk, a larger reduction in Lp(a) may be required, something that we believe may be achieved by targeted RNA-based approaches such as ours.

APOLLO Phase 1 Clinical Program

The APOLLO phase 1 clinical program was a global randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled, single-ascending dose and multiple-ascending dose study investigating the safety, tolerability, pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic response of zerlasiran administered subcutaneously in healthy adults and ASCVD patients with high Lp(a) levels of approximately ≥ 60mg/dL or ≥ 150 nmol/L.

In February 2022, we reported positive results from the single-ascending dose portion of the APOLLO phase 1 program in 32 healthy adults with high Lp(a) ≥ 150 nmol/L. In April 2022, results were simultaneously presented in a late-breaking presentation at the ACC Annual Meeting and published in JAMA. In the single dose trial, participants in the top two dose groups (300 mg and 600 mg) were observed to have experienced up to a 96% and 98% median reduction in Lp(a) levels, respectively, and median reductions of up to 71% and 81% from baseline persisted at 150 days. Those receiving a placebo saw no change in Lp(a) levels. Other efficacy measures included the effects of zerlasiran on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL cholesterol) and ApoB, both of which are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events. The highest doses of zerlasiran reduced LDL cholesterol and ApoB by about 25%. Zerlasiran was well tolerated with no serious safety concerns reported. In November 2022, we presented a further analysis from the APOLLO trial up to 365 days at the American Heart Association 2022 Annual Meeting. The analysis showed median time-averaged Lp(a) reductions over 150 days exceeded 80% in the zerlasiran 300 mg and 600 mg dose groups. At day 365, some participants still exhibited substantially reduced levels of Lp(a) of approximately 50% compared to baseline. Additionally, extension data to day 365 showed no new drug related safety findings.

In November 2023, we reported positive topline results from the multiple-ascending dose portion of the APOLLO program in 36 adults with stable ASCVD and high Lp(a) ≥150 nmol/L. In the multiple dose trial, zerlasiran (200 mg, 300 mg and 450 mg) was administered twice subcutaneously at two different dosing intervals. Data demonstrated a significant reduction from baseline in Lp(a) of up to 99% at 90 days following injection of repeated doses. Lp(a) levels remained approximately 90% lower than baseline at 201 days (end of treatment period) at the two highest doses. A dose dependent reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL cholesterol) and apolipoprotein B (ApoB) was also observed. Zerlasiran was well tolerated; no clinically important safety concerns were identified.

ALPACAR-360 Phase 2 Clinical Program

The ALPACAR-360 phase 2 clinical trial is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial enrolling approximately 160 patients with high Lp(a) ≥ 125nmol/L at high risk of ASCVD events. The primary endpoint is time averaged change in Lp(a) from baseline. The study is fully enrolled and we expect to report topline 36-week data (primary endpoint) in the first quarter of 2024 and topline 48-week data in the second quarter of 2024.

Divesiran (SLN124)

Overview

Divesiran is an siRNA molecule designed for the treatment of genetic hematological conditions, including polycythemia vera (PV). PV is a myeloproliferative neoplasm characterized by the overproduction of blood cells and platelets. Elevated hematocrit is a hallmark of the disease, indicating the overproduction of red blood cells. Patients with hematocrit between 45-50% are four-times more likely to die from cardiovascular causes or major thrombotic events than those with hematocrit less than 45%. PV is a rare disease affecting approximately 150,000 in the U.S. and around 3.5 million worldwide.

Divesiran is administered subcutaneously and works by specifically binding to and inducing RNAi-mediated degradation of mRNAs made from the TMPRSS6 gene. TMPRSS6 is a negative regulator of hepcidin, which is the main hormone controlling iron homeostasis in the body. In PV, red blood cells are over-produced as a form of cancer, causing an increase in total red blood cell mass and overall blood thickness/stickiness as well as iron deficiency that adversely affects other cell types. Lowering levels of the TMPRSS6 protein could increase hepcidin production, restricting iron availability to reduce red cell mass, hemoglobin levels, and hematocrit, as well as reallocate iron to normal functions.

Divesiran demonstrated proof of mechanism in the GEMINI phase 1 trial in healthy volunteers completed in May 2021. In the GEMINI study, divesiran was observed to increase average hepcidin approximately four-fold and reduce serum iron by approximately 50% after a single dose with effects persisting for at least two months. Data were presented at the American Society of Hematology (ASH) 2021 Annual Meeting and published in the American Journal of Hematology in July 2023. Divesiran has FDA Fast Track and orphan disease designations for PV, and is currently being evaluated in the SANRECO phase 1/2 trial in PV patients.

Disadvantages of existing treatment options

The primary treatment goal in PV is to reduce the risk of thrombotic events by reducing hematocrit (the percent volume of red blood cells in the blood) to within target levels. The mainstay of treatment is therapeutic phlebotomy to reduce the number of blood cells by regularly removing blood from the patient. Phlebotomy results in erratic, suboptimal control of hematocrit, and regular phlebotomies can be burdensome to the patient. Patients over 60, or those with prior thrombotic events or additional cardiovascular risk factors are also treated with chemotherapy drugs (cytoreductive agents) to suppress blood cell production. The majority of these patients are treated with hydroxyurea, which is poorly tolerated and carries the risk of potential long term side effects. Patients who are resistant or intolerant to hydroxyurea may be treated with the JAK2 inhibitor ruxolitinib (Jakafi), which carries the risk of thrombocytopenia (low platelet count). Finally, some patients are treated with synthetic hepcidin mimetic dosed weekly by subcutaneous injection in clinical trials. In contrast to synthetic hepcidin mimetics, divesiran elevates endogenous hepcidin produced and secreted by the liver, avoiding high local concentrations of hepcidin at the injection site. We believe the sustained duration of action will allow divesiran to be dosed monthly, or less frequently, bringing additional value to patients.

GEMINI Trial

The GEMINI trial was a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled, single-ascending dose study to investigate the safety, tolerability, PK and PD response of divesiran (1.0, 3.0 and 4.5 mg/kg doses) administered subcutaneously in 24 healthy volunteers. Key outcomes included:

GEMINI II Phase 1 Program

The GEMINI II phase 1 trial evaluated divesiran in non-transfusion dependent thalassemia patients. In the study, divesiran was well tolerated with no safety issues identified. While proof of mechanism has been established in healthy volunteers, the effects on indicators of iron metabolism were variable in this study population of heterogeneous thalassemia subjects. We are prioritizing R&D efforts on the ongoing PV program and do not have plans to advance development in thalassemia at this time.

SANRECO Phase 1/2 Program

The SANRECO phase 1/2 trial is a two-part clinical trial which includes a phase 1 open-label, dose finding trial followed by a phase 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel arm study of divesiran in PV patients. The trial is expected to enroll approximately 65 participants total. The primary endpoint for the phase 1 portion of the trial is safety/tolerability and the assessment of the number of phlebotomies at different intervals. The phase 2 portion of the trial will evaluate the number of patients who are phlebotomy free after treatment. We plan to report data from the phase 1 portion of the study in the first half of 2024.

Collaborations

AstraZeneca

In March 2020, we entered into a collaboration agreement with AstraZeneca to discover, develop and commercialize siRNA therapeutics for the treatment of cardiovascular, renal, metabolic and respiratory diseases. Under this agreement, AstraZeneca made an upfront cash payment to us of $20.0 million in May 2020. AstraZeneca made an additional unconditional cash payment to us of $40.0 million which was received in May 2021. In March 2020, an affiliate of AstraZeneca also subscribed for 4,276,580 new ordinary shares for an aggregate subscription price of $20.0 million.

The collaboration covers five targets initially, with AstraZeneca having the option to extend the collaboration to a further five targets. AstraZeneca has agreed to pay us $10.0 million upon the exercise of each option to collaborate on an additional target. In May 2023, AstraZeneca nominated the first product candidate under our collaboration, triggering a $10 million option fee to us to advance development on an undisclosed program. For each target selected, we will be eligible to receive up to $140.0 million in potential milestone payments upon the achievement of milestones relating to the initiation of specified clinical trials, the acceptance of specified regulatory filings and the first commercial sale in specified jurisdictions. For each target selected, we will also be eligible to receive up to $250.0 million in potential commercial milestone payments, upon the achievement of specified annual net sales levels, as well as tiered royalties as a percentage of net sales ranging from the high single digits to the low double digits.

Mallinckrodt

In July 2019, we entered into a collaboration agreement with Mallinckrodt to develop and commercialize RNAi drug targets designed to silence the complement cascade in complement-mediated disorders. In connection with the

execution of this agreement, Mallinckrodt made an upfront cash payment to us of $20.0 million (equivalent to £16.4 million as of the payment date). Under a separate subscription agreement, Cache Holdings Limited, a wholly owned subsidiary of Mallinckrodt, concurrently subscribed for 5,062,167 new ordinary shares for an aggregate subscription price of $5.0 million (equivalent to £4.0 million as of the payment date). Under the agreement, we granted Mallinckrodt an exclusive worldwide license to our C3 targeting program, SLN501, with options to license two additional undisclosed complement-mediated disease targets from us. In July 2020, Mallinckrodt exercised options on the two additional complement targets.

In March 2023, we reacquired exclusive worldwide rights from Mallinckrodt to the two undisclosed preclinical complement targets. Under the terms of the modified agreement, we did not make any upfront payment to get the two assets back and will potentially pay future success-based milestones and low single digit royalties on net sales if the projects advance. SLN501, the C3 targeting program, remained under the original collaboration agreement. In March 2024, Mallinckrodt notified us that they will not pursue further development of SLN501 following the completion of the phase 1 clinical trial. This will conclude all activities and commitments under the collaboration agreement.

Hansoh

In October 2021, we announced a collaboration agreement with Hansoh, one of the leading biopharmaceutical companies in China, to develop siRNAs for three undisclosed targets leveraging our proprietary mRNAi GOLD™ platform. Under the terms of the agreement, Hansoh will have the exclusive option to license rights to the first two targets in Greater China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan following the completion of phase 1 trials. We will retain exclusive rights for those two targets in all other territories. We will be responsible for all activities up to option exercise and will retain responsibility for development outside the China region post phase 1 trials. Hansoh will also have the exclusive option to license global rights to a third target at the point of IND filing. Hansoh will be responsible for all development activities post option exercise for the third target. Hansoh made a $16 million upfront payment to us in December 2021. We achieved our first $2 million research milestone payment in the Hansoh collaboration in April 2022. In 2023, we achieved two additional preclinical milestones and received $4 million from the collaboration. We are eligible to receive up to $1.3 billion in additional development, regulatory and commercial milestones. We will also receive royalties tiered from low double-digit to mid-teens on Hansoh net product sales.

Competition

The life sciences industry is characterized by rapidly advancing technologies, intense competition and a strong emphasis on proprietary products. We face potential competition from many different sources, including major pharmaceutical, specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic institutions, governmental agencies and public and private research institutions. Many of our competitors may have greater experience in research and development, manufacturing, managing clinical trials and/or regulatory compliance than we do, and may be better resourced financially. Any product candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize will compete with existing products and new products that may become available in the future. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and recruiting lead clinical trial investigators and establishing clinical study sites and patient registration for clinical studies, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs.

Companies that complete clinical trials, obtain required regulatory authority approvals and commence commercial sale of their drugs before their competitors may achieve a significant competitive advantage, and our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient or are less expensive than any products that we may develop and commercialize. Our competitors also may obtain FDA, EMA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we obtain approval, 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. Drugs resulting from our research and development efforts or from our joint efforts with collaboration partners therefore may not be commercially competitive with our competitors’ existing products or products under development. Because our products and many potential competing products are in various stages of preclinical and clinical development, and given the inherent unpredictability of drug development, it is difficult to predict which third parties may provide the most competition, and on what specific basis.

We consider a number of companies to be our competitors in developing RNAi therapeutic products. Some of these companies are seeking, as we are, to develop chemically synthesized siRNA molecules as drugs. Others are following a gene therapy approach, with the goal of treating patients not with synthetic siRNAs but with synthetic, exogenously-introduced genes designed to produce siRNA-like molecules within cells. Additionally, other companies may also develop alternative treatments for the diseases we have identified as being potentially treated with our siRNA molecules. To the extent those alternative treatments are more efficacious, less expensive, more convenient or produce fewer side effects, our market opportunity would be reduced.

We anticipate that we will face intense and increasing competition as new products and therapies enter the market and advanced technologies become available. We expect any treatments that we develop and commercialize to compete on the basis of, among other things, efficacy, safety, delivery, patient friendliness, price and the availability of reimbursement from government and other third-party payers.

Intellectual Property

Patents

We actively seek to protect the intellectual property and proprietary technology that we believe is important to our business, including seeking, maintaining, enforcing and defending patent rights and protecting our related know-how for our siRNA platform technologies such as siRNA stabilization chemistries, as well as for our specific siRNA targeting sequences and related therapeutics and processes, whether developed internally or licensed to third parties. Our success will depend on our ability to obtain and maintain patent and other protections including data/market exclusivity for our product candidates and platform technology, preserve the confidentiality of our know-how and operate without infringing the valid and enforceable patents and proprietary rights of third parties. See the “Risk Factors-Risks Related to Intellectual Property” section of this report.

Our policy is to seek to protect our proprietary position early, generally by filing an initial priority filing in the European Patent Office. This is followed by the filing of one or more international patent applications, including a patent application under the Patent Cooperation Treaty, or PCT, claiming priority from the initial application(s) and then filing regional and national applications for patent grant in territories including, for example, the United States and Europe. In each case, we determine the strategy and territories required after discussion with our patent attorneys and collaboration partners so that we obtain relevant coverage in territories that are commercially important to our technologies and product candidates. With respect to our product candidates and related methods that we intend to develop and commercialize in the normal course of business, we will seek patent protection covering, when legally possible, siRNA sequences alone and with chemical modifications, compositions, methods of use, dosing and formulations. We may also pursue patent protection with respect to manufacturing and drug development processes when possible. We intend to additionally rely on data exclusivity, market exclusivity, other regulatory exclusivities and patent term extensions when available. We also rely on trade secrets and know-how relating to our underlying platform technology and product candidates. In each case, we seek to balance the value of patent protection against the advantage of keeping know-how confidential.

Issued patents can provide exclusivity on claimed subject matter for varying periods of time, typically starting on the date of patent grant and expiring at the end of the legal term of a patent in the country in which it is granted. In general, patents provide exclusionary rights for 20 years from the effective filing date of a non-provisional patent application in a particular country, or for a PCT international patent application, from the international filing date, assuming all maintenance fees are paid. In some instances, patent terms may be increased or decreased, depending on the laws and regulations of the country or jurisdiction that grants the patent. In the United States, a patent term may be shortened if a patent is terminally disclaimed over another patent or as a result of delays in patent prosecution by the patentee. A U.S. patent’s term may be lengthened by a patent term adjustment, which compensates a patentee for administrative delays by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, in granting a patent. The patent term of a European patent is 20 years from its effective filing date, which, unlike in the United States, is not subject to patent term adjustments in the same way as U.S. patents.

The level of protection afforded by a patent may vary and depends upon many factors, including the type of patent, the scope of its claim coverage, claim interpretation and patent law in the country or region that granted the

patent, the validity and enforceability of the patent under such laws, and the availability of legal remedies in each particular country.

In certain regions or countries, regulatory-related patent extensions may be available to extend the term of a patent that claims an approved product or method. Regulatory-based patent term extensions allow patentee to recapture a portion of patent term effectively lost as a result of the regulatory review period for a product candidate. The term of a U.S. patent that covers an FDA-approved drug or biologic, for example, may be eligible for patent term extension, which permits patent term restoration as compensation for the patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process. The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, or the Hatch-Waxman Act, permits a patent term extension of up to five years beyond the expiration of the patent. The length of the patent term extension is related to the length of time the drug or biologic is under regulatory review. Patent extension cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval and only one patent applicable to an approved drug may be extended. Similar provisions are available in Europe, Japan, China and other jurisdictions to extend the term of a patent that covers an approved drug, for example Supplementary Protection Certificates in Europe. In very few jurisdictions (such as in the U.S. and Europe), patent or regulatory exclusivities may potentially be further extended by a pediatric extension, to give an additional six months’ extension, if pre-defined clinical trial data for a pediatric indication are timely submitted and accepted. In the future, if and when our products receive FDA approval, we expect to apply for regulatory patent term extensions on patents covering those products. We anticipate that some of our issued patents may be eligible for patent term extensions in certain jurisdictions based on an approved product or method, but such extensions may not be available and therefore its commercial monopoly may be restricted solely to patent term.

As of December 31, 2023, we solely owned 40 granted patents, of which 10 are U.S.-issued patents, and we owned 151 pending patent applications, of which 15 are U.S. pending patent applications and 10 are co-owned. Commercially or strategically important non-U.S. jurisdictions in which we hold issued or pending patent applications include (in addition to Europe): Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Israel, Japan, Malasia, Mexico, New Zealand, Philippines, Russia, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Taiwan, Ukraine and Vietnam. As of December 31, 2023, we solely owned two and jointly owned one priority application (priority year pending), each of which are first priority applications.

Our granted patents and pending patent applications include compositions of matter claims directed to siRNA molecules and compositions. They also include claims directed to siRNA molecules having specific nucleic acid modifications and linkers as well as specific nucleic acid sequences. In addition, our pending patent applications with an effective filing date after 2003 also include claims directed to methods of use and processes relating to such siRNA molecules and compositions.

Our earliest filed patent applications directed to 19-mer blunt-ended siRNAs with particular siRNA modification patterns expire in August 2023, subject to potential extension. Our current patent application families directed to toolbox elements, if and when granted, would not be expected to expire until at least 2036. Our current patent families covering siRNA sequences directed to specific target genes and associated uses for our SLN360, SLN124 and SLN501 product candidates, if and when granted, would not be expected to expire until at least 2038.

Government Regulation and Product Approval

Review and Approval of New Drug Products in the United States

In the United States, the FDA regulates drugs under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, and its implementing regulations. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and non-U.S. statutes and regulations requires the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Failure to comply with the applicable U.S. requirements at any time during the drug development process, approval process or after approval, may subject an applicant to a variety of administrative or judicial sanctions, such as the FDA’s refusal to approve a pending NDA, withdrawal of an approval, imposition of a clinical hold, issuance of warning or untitled letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, restitution, disgorgement or civil or criminal penalties.

The process required by the FDA before a drug may be marketed in the United States generally involves:

Preclinical Studies

Preclinical studies include laboratory evaluation of product chemistry, toxicity and formulation, as well as animal studies to assess potential pharmacology and toxicology. An IND sponsor must submit the results of the nonclinical tests, together with manufacturing information, analytical data and any available clinical data or literature, among other things, to the FDA as part of an IND. Some nonclinical testing may continue even after the IND is submitted. An IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless before that time the FDA raises concerns or questions related to one or more proposed clinical trials and places the clinical trial on a clinical hold. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin. As a result, submission of an IND may result in the FDA not allowing clinical trials to commence.

Clinical Trials

Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational new drug to human subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators in accordance with GCP requirements, which include, among other things, the requirement that all research subjects provide their informed consent in writing for their participation in any clinical trial. Clinical trials are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the trial, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. A protocol for each clinical trial and any subsequent protocol amendments must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. In addition, an IRB at each institution participating in the clinical trial must review and approve the plan for any clinical trial before it commences at that institution, and the IRB must continue to oversee the clinical trial while it is being conducted.

Human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases, which may overlap or be combined. In phase 1, the drug is initially introduced into healthy human subjects or patients with the target disease or condition and tested for safety, dosage tolerance, absorption, metabolism, distribution, excretion and, if possible, to gain an initial indication of its effectiveness. In phase 2, the drug typically is administered to a limited patient population to identify possible adverse effects and safety risks, to preliminarily evaluate the efficacy of the product for specific

targeted diseases and to determine dosage tolerance and optimal dosage. In phase 3, the drug is administered to an expanded patient population, generally at geographically dispersed clinical trial sites, in well-controlled clinical trials to generate enough data to statistically evaluate the safety and efficacy of the product for approval, to establish the overall risk-benefit profile of the product and to provide adequate information for the labeling of the product.

Progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials must be submitted, at least annually, to the FDA, and more frequently if SAEs occur. Phase 1, phase 2 and phase 3 clinical trials might not be completed successfully within any specified period, or at all. Furthermore, the FDA or the sponsor may suspend or terminate a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research subjects are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an IRB can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical trial at its institution if the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements, or if the drug has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients.

Marketing Approval

Assuming successful completion of the required clinical testing, the results of the preclinical studies and clinical trials, together with detailed information relating to the product’s chemistry, manufacture, controls and proposed labeling, among other things, are submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA requesting approval to market the product for one or more indications. In most cases, the submission of an NDA is subject to a substantial application user fee. Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, or PDUFA, guidelines that are currently in effect, the FDA has a goal of ten months from the date of “filing” of a standard NDA for a new molecular entity to review and act on the submission. This review typically takes twelve months from the date the NDA is submitted to the FDA because the FDA has approximately two months to make a “filing” decision.

In addition, under the Pediatric Research Equity Act, certain NDAs or supplements to an NDA must contain data that are adequate to assess the safety and effectiveness of the drug for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations, and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe and effective. The FDA may, on its own initiative or at the request of the applicant, grant deferrals for submission of some or all pediatric data until after approval of the product for use in adults, or full or partial waivers from the pediatric data requirements. Unless otherwise required by regulation, the pediatric data requirements do not apply to a product for an indication with orphan designation.

The FDA also may require submission of a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy, or REMS, to ensure that the benefits of the drug outweigh its risks. The REMS could include medication guides, physician communication plans, assessment plans, and/or elements to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries or other risk minimization tools.

The FDA conducts a preliminary review of all NDAs within the first 60 days after submission, before accepting them for filing, to determine whether they are sufficiently complete to permit substantive review. The FDA may request additional information rather than accept an NDA for filing. In this event, the application must be resubmitted with the additional information. The resubmitted application is also subject to review before the FDA accepts it for filing. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth substantive review. The FDA reviews an NDA to determine, among other things, whether the drug is safe and effective and whether the facility in which it is manufactured, processed, packaged or held meets standards designed to assure the product’s continued safety, quality and purity.

The FDA may refer an application for a novel drug to an advisory committee. An advisory committee is a panel of independent experts, including clinicians and other scientific experts, that reviews, evaluates and provides a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and under what conditions. The FDA is not bound by the recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations carefully when making decisions.

Before approving an NDA, the FDA typically will inspect the facility or facilities where the product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve an application unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with cGMP requirements and are adequate to assure consistent production of the product

within required specifications. Additionally, before approving an NDA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical trial sites to assure compliance with GCP requirements.

The testing and approval process for an NDA requires substantial time, effort and financial resources, and takes several years to complete. Data obtained from preclinical and clinical testing are not always conclusive and may be susceptible to varying interpretations, which could delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. The FDA may not grant approval of an NDA on a timely basis, or at all.

After evaluating the NDA and all related information, including the advisory committee recommendation, if any, and inspection reports regarding the manufacturing facilities and clinical trial sites, the FDA may issue an approval letter, or, in some cases, a complete response letter. A complete response letter generally contains a statement of specific conditions that must be met in order to secure final approval of the NDA and may require additional clinical or preclinical testing in order for FDA to reconsider the application. Even with submission of this additional information, the FDA ultimately may decide that the application does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval. If and when those conditions have been met to the FDA’s satisfaction, the FDA will typically issue an approval letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the drug with specific prescribing information for specific indications.

Even if the FDA approves a product, it may limit the approved indications for use of the product, require that contraindications, warnings or precautions be included in the product labeling, require that post-approval studies, including phase 4 clinical trials, be conducted to further assess a drug’s safety after approval, require testing and surveillance programs to monitor the product after commercialization, or impose other conditions, including distribution and use restrictions or other risk management mechanisms under a REMS, which can materially affect the potential market and profitability of the product. The FDA may prevent or limit further marketing of a product based on the results of post-marketing studies or surveillance programs. After approval, some types of changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications, manufacturing changes, and additional labeling claims, are subject to further testing requirements and FDA review and approval.

Orphan Drug Designation

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan drug designation to a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or if it affects more than 200,000, there is no reasonable expectation that sales of the drug in the United States will be sufficient to offset the costs of developing and making the drug available in the United States. Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting an NDA. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in or shorten the duration of the regulatory review and approval process.

If the FDA approves a sponsor’s marketing application for a designated orphan drug for use in the rare disease or condition for which it was designated, the sponsor is eligible for a seven-year period of marketing exclusivity, during which the FDA may not approve another sponsor’s marketing application for a drug with the same active moiety and intended for the same disease or condition as the approved orphan drug, except in limited circumstances, such as if a subsequent sponsor demonstrates its product is clinically superior. During a sponsor’s orphan drug exclusivity period, competitors, however, may receive approval for drugs with different active moieties for the same disease or condition as the approved orphan drug, or for drugs with the same active moiety as the approved orphan drug, but for different diseases or conditions. A competitor’s orphan drug exclusivity could block the approval of one of our products for seven years if the competitor obtains approval for a drug with the same active moiety intended for the same disease or condition before we do, unless we are able to demonstrate that grounds for revocation of the competitor’s orphan drug designation and orphan drug exclusivity exist, or that our product is clinically superior. Further, if a designated orphan drug receives marketing approval for an indication broader than the rare disease or condition for which it received orphan drug designation, it may not be entitled to exclusivity.

Rare Pediatric Disease, or RPD, designation by FDA may enable priority review voucher, or PRV, eligibility upon U.S. market approval of a designated drug for rare pediatric diseases. The RPD-PRV program is intended to encourage development of therapies to prevent and treat rare pediatric diseases. The voucher, which is awarded upon NDA approval to the sponsor of a designated RPD, can be sold or transferred to another entity and used by the holder to receive priority review for a future NDA or BLA submission, which reduces the FDA’s target review time of such

future submission from ten to six months from the date of “filing” of an NDA for a new molecular entity. However, priority review does not guarantee that the FDA will review and approve an application within six months of filing.

Post-approval Requirements

Drugs manufactured or distributed pursuant to FDA approvals are subject to pervasive and continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, requirements relating to recordkeeping, periodic reporting, product sampling and distribution, advertising and promotion and reporting of adverse experiences with the product. After approval, many changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications, manufacturing changes or certain labeling changes, are subject to further testing requirements and prior FDA review and approval. There also are continuing annual user fee requirements for any marketed products.

Even if the FDA approves a product, it may limit the approved indications for use of the product, require that contraindications, warnings or precautions be included in the product labeling, including a boxed warning, require that post-approval studies, including phase 4 clinical trials, be conducted to further assess a drug’s safety after approval, require testing and surveillance programs to monitor the product after commercialization, or impose other conditions, including distribution restrictions or other risk management mechanisms under a REMS, which can materially affect the potential market and profitability of the product. The FDA may prevent or limit further marketing of a product based on the results of post-marketing studies or surveillance programs.

In addition, drug manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved drugs are required to register their establishments with the FDA and state agencies, and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and these state agencies for compliance with cGMP requirements. Changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated and often require prior FDA approval before being implemented. FDA regulations also require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMP and impose reporting and documentation requirements upon the sponsor and any third-party manufacturers that the sponsor may decide to use. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain cGMP compliance.

Once an approval is granted, the FDA may withdraw the approval if compliance with regulatory requirements and standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the market.

Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including AEs of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in mandatory revisions to the approved labeling to add new safety or effectiveness information; imposition of post-market studies or clinical trials to assess safety risks; or imposition of distribution or other restrictions under a REMS program. Other potential consequences include, among other things:

The FDA strictly regulates marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of products that are placed on the market. Drugs may be promoted only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label, although physicians, in the practice of medicine, may prescribe approved drugs for unapproved indications. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of

off-label uses, and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off-label uses may be subject to significant liability.

In addition, the distribution of prescription pharmaceutical products is subject to the Prescription Drug Marketing Act, or PDMA, which regulates the distribution of drugs and drug samples at the federal level, and sets minimum standards for the registration and regulation of drug distributors by the states. Both the PDMA and state laws limit the distribution of prescription pharmaceutical product samples and impose requirements to ensure accountability in distribution.

Federal and State Fraud and Abuse, Data Privacy and Security, and Transparency Laws and Regulations and Foreign Equivalents

In addition to FDA restrictions on marketing of pharmaceutical products, federal and state healthcare laws and regulations restrict business practices in the biopharmaceutical industry. These laws may impact, among other things, our current and future business operations, including our clinical research activities, and proposed sales, marketing and education programs and constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships with healthcare providers and other parties through which we market, sell and distribute our products for which we obtain marketing approval. These laws include anti-kickback and false claims laws and regulations, data privacy and security, and transparency laws and regulations, including, without limitation, those laws described below.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting or receiving remuneration to induce or in return for purchasing, leasing, ordering or arranging for or recommending the purchase, lease or order of any item or service reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid or other federal healthcare programs. The term “remuneration” has been broadly interpreted to include anything of value. The Anti-Kickback Statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on the one hand and prescribers, purchasers and formulary managers on the other. Although there are a number of statutory exemptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting some common activities from prosecution, the exemptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly. Practices that involve remuneration that may be alleged to be intended to induce prescribing, purchases or recommendations may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exemption or safe harbor. Several courts have interpreted the statute’s intent requirement to mean that if any one purpose of an arrangement involving remuneration is to induce referrals of federal healthcare covered business, the statute has been violated.

A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of this statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal civil False Claims Act or the civil monetary penalties statute, which imposes penalties against any person who is determined to have presented or caused to be presented a claim to a federal health program that the person knows or should know is for an item or service that was not provided as claimed or is false or fraudulent.

Federal false claims laws, including the federal civil False Claims Act, prohibits any person or entity from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false claim for payment to the federal government or knowingly making, using or causing to be made or used a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim to the federal government. A claim includes “any request or demand” for money or property presented to the U.S. government. Several pharmaceutical and other healthcare companies have been prosecuted under these laws for allegedly providing free product to customers with the expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for the product. Other companies have been prosecuted for causing false claims to be submitted because of the companies’ marketing of products for unapproved, and thus non-reimbursable, uses.

The federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, created additional federal criminal statutes that prohibit, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, including private third-party payers and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services. Also, many states have similar fraud and abuse statutes or regulations that apply to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid and other state programs, or, in several states, apply regardless of the payer.

In addition, we may be subject to data privacy and security regulation by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH, and their respective implementing regulations, imposes specified requirements on certain types of individuals and entities relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. Among other things, HITECH makes HIPAA’s security standards directly applicable to “business associates,” defined as independent contractors or agents of covered entities that create, receive, maintain or transmit protected health information in connection with providing a service for or on behalf of a covered entity. HITECH also increased the civil and criminal penalties that may be imposed against covered entities, business associates and possibly other persons, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce the federal HIPAA laws and seek attorneys' fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. In addition, state laws govern the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which are not preempted by HIPAA, differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts.

The federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, with specific exceptions, to report annually to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, information related to payments or other transfers of value made to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), other healthcare professionals (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners), and teaching hospitals, and applicable manufacturers and applicable group purchasing organizations to report annually to CMS ownership and investment interests held by the physicians and their immediate family members.

We may also be subject to state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government, as well as state laws that require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures.

We may be subject to foreign equivalents of all of the above federal or state legislation. For example, outside the United States, interactions between pharmaceutical companies and health care professionals are also governed by strict laws, such as national anti-bribery laws of European countries, national sunshine rules, regulations, industry self-regulation codes of conduct and physicians’ codes of professional conduct. Failure to comply with these requirements could result in reputational risk, public reprimands, administrative penalties, fines or imprisonment.

Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of available statutory and regulatory exemptions, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the federal and state laws described above or any other governmental regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including criminal and significant civil monetary penalties, damages, fines, individual imprisonment, additional reporting requirements and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, disgorgement, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations. To the extent that any of our products are sold in a foreign country, we may be subject to similar foreign laws and regulations, which may include, for instance, applicable post-marketing requirements, including safety surveillance, anti-fraud and abuse laws and implementation of corporate compliance programs and reporting of payments or transfers of value to healthcare professionals.

Coverage and Reimbursement in the United States

The future commercial success of our product candidates or any of our collaborators’ ability to commercialize any approved product candidates successfully will depend in part on the extent to which governmental payer programs at the federal and state levels, including Medicare and Medicaid, private health insurers and other third-party payers provide coverage for and establish adequate reimbursement levels for our product candidates. Government health administration authorities, private health insurers and other organizations generally decide which drugs they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels for healthcare. In particular, in the United States, private health insurers and

other third-party payers often provide reimbursement for products and services based on the level at which the government, through the Medicare or Medicaid programs, provides reimbursement for such treatments. In the United States, the European Union, and other potentially significant markets for our product candidates, government authorities and third-party payers are increasingly attempting to limit or regulate the price of medical products and services, particularly for new and innovative products and therapies, which often has resulted in average selling prices lower than they would otherwise be. Further, the increased emphasis on managed healthcare in the United States will put additional pressure on product pricing, reimbursement and usage, which may adversely affect our future product sales and results of operations. These pressures can arise from rules and practices of managed care groups, judicial decisions and laws and regulations related to Medicare, Medicaid and healthcare reform, pharmaceutical coverage and reimbursement policies and pricing in general.

Third-party payers are increasingly imposing additional requirements and restrictions on coverage and limiting reimbursement levels for medical products. For example, federal and state governments reimburse covered prescription drugs at varying rates generally below average wholesale price. These restrictions and limitations influence the purchase of healthcare services and products. Third-party payers may limit coverage to specific drug products on an approved list, or formulary, which might not include all of the FDA-approved drug products for a particular indication. Third-party payers are increasingly challenging the price and examining the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of medical products and services, in addition to their safety and efficacy. We may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies in order to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of our products, in addition to the costs required to obtain the FDA approvals. Our product candidates may not be considered medically necessary or cost-effective. A payer’s decision to provide coverage for a drug product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Further, one payer’s determination to provide coverage for a drug product does not assure that other payers will also provide coverage for the drug product. Adequate third-party reimbursement may not be available to enable us to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on our investment in drug development. Legislative proposals to reform healthcare or reduce costs under government insurance programs may result in lower reimbursement for our products and product candidates or exclusion of our product candidates from coverage. The cost containment measures that healthcare payers and providers are instituting and any healthcare reform could significantly reduce our revenues from the sale of any approved product candidates. We cannot provide any assurances that we will be able to obtain and maintain third-party coverage or adequate reimbursement for our product candidates in whole or in part.

There have been several U.S. government initiatives over the past several years to fund and incentivize certain comparative effectiveness research, including creation of the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, or collectively the PPACA. It is also possible that comparative effectiveness research demonstrating benefits in a competitor’s product could adversely affect the sales of our product candidates. If third-party payers do not consider our product candidates to be cost-effective compared to other available therapies, they may not cover our product candidates, once approved, as a benefit under their plans or, if they do, the level of payment may not be sufficient to allow us to sell our product on a profitable basis.

In addition, there has been increasing legislative and enforcement interest in the United States with respect to specialty drug pricing practices. Specifically, there have been several recent U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed federal and proposed and enacted state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. These and other healthcare reform initiatives may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding. On March 11, 2021, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 into law, which eliminates the statutory Medicaid drug rebate price cap, currently set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price for single source and innovator multiple source products, beginning on January 1, 2024. Further, in July 2021, the Biden Administration released an executive order that included multiple provisions aimed at prescription drugs. In response to Biden's executive order, on September 9, 2021, U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, or HHS, released a Comprehensive Plan for Addressing High Drug Prices that outlines principles for drug price reform. The plan sets out a variety of potential legislative policies that Congress could pursue as well as potential administrative actions by HHS. In addition, on August 16, 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, or the IRA, into law, which among other things, extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in PPACA marketplaces through plan year 2025. The IRA also eliminates the “donut hole” under the Medicare Part D program beginning in 2025 by significantly lowering the

beneficiary maximum out-of-pocket cost and creating a new manufacturer discount program. Additionally, the IRA, among other things, (i) directs HHS to negotiate the price of certain high-expenditure, single-source drugs and biologics covered under Medicare, and subject drug manufacturers to civil monetary penalties and a potential excise tax by offering a price that is not equal to or less than the negotiated “maximum fair price” under the law, and (ii) imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation. The IRA permits HHS to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. These provisions take effect progressively starting in fiscal year 2023. On August 29, 2023, HHS announced the list of the first ten drugs that will be subject to price negotiations, although the Medicare drug price negotiation program is currently subject to legal challenges. It is currently unclear how the IRA will be effectuated but it is likely to have a significant impact on the pharmaceutical industry. In response to the Biden administration’s October 2022 executive order, on February 14, 2023, HHS released a report outlining three new models for testing by the CMS Innovation Center which will be evaluated on their ability to lower the cost of drugs, promote accessibility, and improve quality of care. It is unclear whether the models will be utilized in any health reform measures in the future. Further, on December 7, 2023, the Biden administration announced an initiative to control the price of prescription drugs through the use of march-in rights under the Bayh-Dole Act. On December 8, 2023, the National Institute of Standards and Technology published for comment a Draft Interagency Guidance Framework for Considering the Exercise of March-In Rights which for the first time includes the price of a product as one factor an agency can use when deciding to exercise march-in rights. While march-in rights have not previously been exercised, it is uncertain if that will continue under the new framework. Individual states in the United States also have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. For example, on January 5, 2024, the FDA approved Florida’s Section 804 Importation Program, or SIP, proposal to import certain drugs from Canada for specific state healthcare programs. It is unclear how this program will be implemented, including which drugs will be chosen, and whether it will be subject to legal challenges in the United States or Canada. Other states have also submitted SIP proposals that are pending review by the FDA. Any such approved importation plans, when implemented, may result in lower drug prices for products covered by those programs.

Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the Bribery Act and Other Laws

The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or FCPA, prohibits any U.S. individual or business from paying, offering, or authorizing payment or offering of anything of value, directly or indirectly, to any foreign official, political party or candidate for the purpose of influencing any act or decision of the foreign entity in order to assist the individual or business in obtaining or retaining business. The FCPA also obligates companies whose securities are listed in the United States to comply with accounting provisions requiring the company to maintain books and records that accurately and fairly reflect all transactions of the corporation, including international subsidiaries, and to devise and maintain an adequate system of internal accounting controls for international operations. Activities that violate the FCPA, even if they occur wholly outside the United States, can result in criminal and civil fines, imprisonment, disgorgement, oversight, and debarment from government contracts.

Our operations are also subject to non-U.S. anti-corruption laws such as the Bribery Act. As with the FCPA, these laws generally prohibit us and our employees and intermediaries from authorizing, promising, offering, or providing, directly or indirectly, improper or prohibited payments, or anything else of value, to government officials or other persons to obtain or retain business or gain some other business advantage. Under the Bribery Act, we may also be liable for failing to prevent a person associated with us from committing a bribery offense.

We are also subject to other laws and regulations governing our international operations, including regulations administered by the governments of the United Kingdom and the United States and authorities in the European Union, including applicable export control regulations, economic sanctions and embargoes on certain countries and persons, anti-money laundering laws, import and customs requirements and currency exchange regulations, collectively referred to as trade control laws.

Failure to comply with the Bribery Act, the FCPA and other anti-corruption laws and trade control laws could subject us to criminal and civil penalties, disgorgement and other sanctions and remedial measures, and legal expenses.

Review and Approval of New Drug Products in the European Union

In the European Union, medicinal products are subject to extensive pre- and post-market regulation by regulatory authorities at both the European Union and national levels. An evolving global regulatory view on the classification of RNA therapies could impact the requirements applied to our siRNA compounds. Additionally, there may be local legislation in various EU Member States, which may be more restrictive than the EU legislation, and we would need to comply with such legislation to the extent it applies.

Clinical Trials

Clinical trials of medicinal products in the European Union must be conducted in accordance with EU and national regulations and the International Conference on Harmonization, or ICH, guidelines on GCP and the applicable regulatory requirements and the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki. Medicines used in clinical trials must be manufactured in accordance with the guidelines on cGMP and in a GMP licensed facility, which can be subject to GMP inspections. The sponsor of clinical trials must take out a clinical trial insurance policy, and in most EU countries, the sponsor is liable to provide “no fault” compensation to any study subject injured in the clinical trial.

In the EU, clinical trials are governed by the Clinical Trials Regulation (EU) No 536/2014, or CTR, which entered into application on January 31, 2022 repealing and replacing the Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC, or CTD. The CTR is intended to harmonize and streamline clinical trial authorizations, simplify adverse-event reporting procedures, improve the supervision of clinical trials and increase transparency. Specifically, the Regulation, which is directly applicable in all EU Member States, introduces a streamlined application procedure through a single-entry point, the "EU portal", the Clinical Trials Information System, or CTIS; a single set of documents to be prepared and submitted for the application; as well as simplified reporting procedures for clinical trial sponsors. A harmonized procedure for the assessment of applications for clinical trials has been introduced and is divided into two parts. Part I assessment is led by the competent authorities of a reference Member State selected by the trial sponsor and relates to clinical trial aspects that are considered to be scientifically harmonized across EU Member States. This assessment is then submitted to the competent authorities of all concerned Member States in which the trial is to be conducted for their review. Part II is assessed separately by the competent authorities and Ethics Committees in each concerned EU Member State. Individual EU Member States retain the power to authorize the conduct of clinical trials on their territory.

The extent to which on-going clinical trials will be governed by the CTR will depend on the duration of the individual clinical trial. For clinical trials in relation to which an application for approval was made on the basis of the CTD before January 31, 2023, the CTD will continue to apply on a transitional basis until January 31, 2025. By that date, all ongoing trials will become subject to the provisions of the CTR. The CTR will apply to clinical trials from an earlier date if the related clinical trial application was made on the basis of the CTR or if the clinical trial has already transitioned to the CTR framework before January 31, 2025.

During the development of a medicinal product, the EU and national medicines regulators within the European Union provide the opportunity for dialogue and guidance on the development program. At the EU level, developers of medicinal products can ask the EMA for scientific advice and protocol assistance at any stage of development and regardless of whether the medicinal product is eligible for the centralized authorization procedure or not. Assistance is given by the EMA’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use, or CHMP, on the recommendation of the Scientific Advice Working Party. A fee is incurred with each scientific advice procedure, but this can be waived for orphan medicinal products. Advice from the EMA is provided based on questions concerning, quality aspects (manufacturing, chemical, pharmaceutical and biological testing of the medicine ), nonclinical testing (toxicological and pharmacological tests designed to show the activity of the medicine in the laboratory) and clinical aspects (appropriateness of studies in patients or healthy volunteers, selection of endpoints), methodological issues (statistical tests to use, data analysis, modelling and simulation), overall development strategy (conditional marketing authorization, bridging strategy for generics, safety database), significant benefit for maintaining orphan designation, and pediatric developments. To the extent that we do obtain such scientific advice in the future, while the company is expected to respect the outcome of the scientific advice procedure, such advice is not legally binding.

Marketing Authorizations

In the EU, medicinal products can only be commercialized after a related marketing authorization, or MA, has been granted. To obtain an MA for a product in the EU, an applicant must submit a Marketing Authorization Application, or MAA, either under a centralized procedure administered by the European Medicines Agency, or EMA, or one of the procedures administered by the competent authorities of EU Member States (decentralized procedure, national procedure or mutual recognition procedure). An MA may be granted only to an applicant established in the EU.

The centralized procedure provides for the grant of a single MA by the European Commission that is valid throughout the EEA (which is comprised of the 27 EU Member States plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein). Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, the centralized procedure is compulsory for specific products, including for (i) medicinal products derived from biotechnological processes, (ii) products designated as orphan medicinal products, (iii) advanced therapy medicinal products, or ATMPs, and (iv) products with a new active substance indicated for the treatment of HIV/AIDS, cancer, neurodegenerative diseases, diabetes, auto-immune and other immune dysfunctions and viral diseases. For products with a new active substance indicated for the treatment of other diseases and products that are highly innovative or for which a centralized process is in the interest of patients, authorization through the centralized procedure is optional on related approval.

Under the centralized procedure, the EMA’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use, or CHMP, conducts the initial assessment of a product. The CHMP is also responsible for several post-authorization and maintenance activities, such as the assessment of modifications or extensions to an existing MA. The maximum timeframe for the evaluation of an MAA under the centralized procedure is 210 days, excluding clock stops when additional information or written or oral explanation is to be provided by the applicant in response to questions of the CHMP. Accelerated assessment may be granted by the CHMP in exceptional cases, when a medicinal product targeting an unmet medical need is expected to be of major interest from the point of view of public health and, in particular, from the viewpoint of therapeutic innovation. If the CHMP accepts a request for accelerated assessment, the time limit of 210 days will be reduced to 150 days (excluding clock stops). The CHMP can, however, revert to the standard time limit for the centralized procedure if it considers that it is no longer appropriate to conduct an accelerated assessment.

Unlike the centralized authorization procedure, the decentralized MA procedure requires a separate application to, and leads to separate approval by, the competent authorities of each EU Member State in which the product is to be marketed. This application is identical to the application that would be submitted to the EMA for authorization through the centralized procedure. The reference EU Member State prepares a draft assessment and drafts of the related materials within 120 days after receipt of a valid application. The resulting assessment report is submitted to the concerned EU Member States who, within 90 days of receipt, must decide whether to approve the assessment report and related materials. If a concerned EU Member State cannot approve the assessment report and related materials due to concerns relating to a potential serious risk to public health, disputed elements may be referred to the Heads of Medicines Agencies’ Coordination Group for Mutual Recognition and Decentralised Procedures – Human, or CMDh, for review. The subsequent decision of the European Commission is binding on all EU Member States.

The mutual recognition procedure allows companies that have a medicinal product already authorized in one EU Member State to apply for this authorization to be recognized by the competent authorities in other EU Member States. Like the decentralized procedure, the mutual recognition procedure is based on the acceptance by the competent authorities of the EU Member States of the MA of a medicinal product by the competent authorities of other EU Member States. The holder of a national MA may submit an application to the competent authority of an EU Member State requesting that this authority recognize the MA delivered by the competent authority of another EU Member State.

An MA has, in principle, an initial validity of five years. The MA may be renewed after five years on the basis of a re-evaluation of the risk-benefit balance by the EMA or by the competent authority of the EU Member State in which the original MA was granted. To support the application, the MA holder must provide the EMA or the competent authority with a consolidated version of the Common Technical Document providing up-to-date data concerning the quality, safety and efficacy of the product, including all variations introduced since the MA was granted, at least nine months before the MA ceases to be valid. The European Commission or the competent authorities of the EU Member

States may decide on justified grounds relating to pharmacovigilance, to proceed with one further five year renewal period for the MA. Once subsequently definitively renewed, the MA shall be valid for an unlimited period. Any authorization which is not followed by the actual placing of the medicinal product on the EU market (for a centralized MA) or on the market of the authorizing EU Member State within three years after authorization ceases to be valid (the so-called sunset clause).

Innovative products that target an unmet medical need and are expected to be of major public health interest may be eligible for a number of expedited development and review programs, such as the Priority Medicines, or PRIME, scheme, which provides incentives similar to the breakthrough therapy designation in the U.S. PRIME is a voluntary scheme aimed at enhancing the EMA’s support for the development of medicinal products that target unmet medical needs. Eligible products must target conditions for which there is an unmet medical need (there is no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment in the EU or, if there is, the new medicinal product will bring a major therapeutic advantage) and they must demonstrate the potential to address the unmet medical need by introducing new methods of therapy or improving existing ones. Benefits accrue to sponsors of product candidates with PRIME designation, including but not limited to, early and proactive regulatory dialogue with the EMA, frequent discussions on clinical trial designs and other development program elements, and potentially accelerated MAA assessment once a dossier has been submitted.

In the EU, a “conditional” MA may be granted in cases where all the required safety and efficacy data are not yet available. The European Commission may grant a conditional MA for a medicinal product if it is demonstrated that all of the following criteria are met: (i) the benefit-risk balance of the medicinal product is positive; (ii) it is likely that the applicant will be able to provide comprehensive data post-authorization; (iii) the medicinal product fulfils an unmet medical need; and (iv) the benefit of the immediate availability to patients of the medicinal product is greater than the risk inherent in the fact that additional data are still required. The conditional MA is subject to conditions to be fulfilled for generating the missing data or ensuring increased safety measures. It is valid for one year and must be renewed annually until all related conditions have been fulfilled. Once any pending studies are provided, the conditional MA can be converted into a traditional MA. However, if the conditions are not fulfilled within the timeframe set by the EMA and approved by the European Commission, the MA will cease to be renewed.

An MA may also be granted “under exceptional circumstances” where the applicant can show that it is unable to provide comprehensive data on efficacy and safety under normal conditions of use even after the product has been authorized and subject to specific procedures being introduced. These circumstances may arise in particular when the intended indications are very rare and, in the state of scientific knowledge at that time, it is not possible to provide comprehensive information, or when generating data may be contrary to generally accepted ethical principles. Like a conditional MA, an MA granted in exceptional circumstances is reserved to medicinal products intended to be authorized for treatment of rare diseases or unmet medical needs for which the applicant does not hold a complete data set that is required for the grant of a standard MA. However, unlike the conditional MA, an applicant for authorization in exceptional circumstances is not subsequently required to provide the missing data. Although the MA “under exceptional circumstances” is granted definitively, the risk-benefit balance of the medicinal product is reviewed annually, and the MA will be withdrawn if the risk-benefit ratio is no longer favorable.

Data Exclusivity

The EU provides opportunities for data and market exclusivity related to MAs. Upon receiving an MA, innovative medicinal productsare generally entitledto receive eight years of data exclusivity and 10 years of market exclusivity. Data exclusivity, if granted, preventsregulatory authorities in the EU from referencing the innovator’s data to assess a genericapplication or biosimilar application for eight years from the date of authorization of the innovative product, after which a generic or biosimilar MAA can be submitted, and the innovator’s data may be referenced. The market exclusivity period prevents a successful generic or biosimilar applicant from commercializing its productin the EU until 10 yearshave elapsed from the initialMA of the reference product in the EU. The overall ten-yearperiod may, occasionally, be extended for a furtheryear to a maximum of 11 years if, during the first eight years of those ten years, the MA holder obtains an authorization for one or more new therapeutic indications which, during the scientific evaluation prior to their authorization, are held to bring a significant clinical benefit in comparison with existing therapies.However, there is no guarantee that a product will be considered by the EU’s regulatory authorities to be a new chemical/biological entity, and products may not qualify for data exclusivity.

There is a special regime for biosimilars, or biological medicinal products that are similar to a reference medicinal product but that do not meet the definition of a generic medicinal product, for example, because of differences in raw materials or manufacturing processes. For such products, the results of appropriate preclinical or clinical trials must be provided in support of the MAA, and guidelines from the EMA detail the type of quantity of supplementary data to be provided for different types of biological product. There are no such guidelines for complex biological products, such as gene or cell therapy medicinal products, and so it is unlikely that biosimilars of those products will currently be approved in the European Union. However, guidance from the EMA states that they will be considered in the future in light of the scientific knowledge and regulatory experience gained at the time.

Pediatric Development

In the EU, Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 provides that all MAAs for new medicinal products have to include the results of trials conducted in the pediatric population, in compliance with a pediatric investigation plan, or PIP, agreed with the EMA’s Pediatric Committee,or PDCO. The PIP sets out the timing and measures proposed to generate data to support a pediatric indication of the medicinal product for which MA is being sought. The PDCO can grant a deferral of the obligation to implement some or all of the measures provided in the PIP until there are sufficient data to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of the product in adults. Further,the obligation to provide pediatric clinical trial data can be waived by the PDCO when these data are not needed or appropriate because the product is likely to be ineffective or unsafe in children, the disease or condition for which the product is intended occurs only in adult populations, or when the product does not represent a significant therapeutic benefit over existing treatments for pediatric patients.Once the MA is obtained in all EU Member States and study results are included in the product information, even when negative, the product is eligible for a six-month extension to the Supplementary Protection Certificate, or SPC, if any is in effect at the time of authorization or, in the case of orphan medicinal products,a two-year extension of orphan market exclusivity.

Orphan Designation

In the EU, Regulation (EC) No. 141/2000, as implemented by Regulation (EC) No. 847/2000 provides that a medicinal product can be designated as an orphan medicinal product by the European Commission if its sponsor can establish that: (i) the product is intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of life-threatening or chronically debilitating conditions; (ii) either (a) such conditions affect not more than 5 in 10,000 persons in the EU when the application is made, or (b) the product without the benefits derived from orphan status, would not generate sufficient return in the EU to justify the necessary investment in developing the medicinal product; and (iii) there exists no satisfactory authorized method of diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of the condition that has been authorized in the EU, or even if such method exists, the product will be of significant benefit to those affected by that condition.

Regulation (EC) No 847/2000 sets out further provisions for implementation of the criteria for designation of a medicinal product as an orphan medicinal product. An application for the designation of a medicinal product as an orphan medicinal product must be submitted at any stage of development of the medicinal product but before filing of an MAA. An MA for an orphan medicinal product may only include indications designated as orphan. For non-orphan indications treated with the same active pharmaceutical ingredient, a separate marketing authorization has to be sought.

Orphan medicinal product designation entitles an applicant to incentives such fee reductions or fee waivers, protocol assistance, and access to the centralized marketing authorization procedure. Upon grant of a marketing authorization, orphan medicinal products are entitled to a ten-year period of market exclusivity for the approved therapeutic indication, which means that the EMA cannot accept another marketing authorization application or accept an application to extend for a similar product and the European Commission cannot grant a marketing authorization for the same indication for a period of ten years. The period of market exclusivity is extended by two years for orphan medicinal products that have also complied with an agreed PIP. No extension to any supplementary protection certificate can be granted on the basis of pediatric studies for orphan indications. Orphan medicinal product designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process.

The period of market exclusivity may, however, be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, it is established that the product no longer meets the criteria on the basis of which it received orphan medicinal product destination, including where it can be demonstrated on the basis of available evidence that the original orphan

medicinal product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity or where the prevalence of the condition has increased above the threshold. Additionally, an MA may be granted to a similar medicinal product with the same orphan indication during the 10 year period if: (i) if the applicant consents to a second original orphan medicinal product application, (ii) if the manufacturer of the original orphan medicinal product is unable to supply sufficient quantities; or (iii) if the second applicant can establish that its product, although similar, is safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior to the original orphan medicinal product. A company may voluntarily remove a product from the register of orphan products.

Post-Approval Controls

Where an MA is granted in relation to a medicinal product in the EU, the holder of the MA is required to comply with a range of regulatory requirements applicable to the manufacturing, marketing, promotion and sale of medicinal products. Similar to the United States,both MA holders and manufacturers of medicinal products are subject to comprehensive regulatory oversight by the EMA, the European Commission and/or the competent regulatory authorities of the individual EU Member States. The holder of an MA must establish and maintain a pharmacovigilance system and appoint an individual qualified person for pharmacovigilance who is responsible for oversight of that system.Key obligations include expedited reporting of suspected serious adverse reactions and submission of periodic safety update reports,or PSURs.

All new MAAs must include a risk management plan, or RMP, describing the risk management system that the company will put in place and documenting measures to prevent or minimize the risks associated with the product. The regulatory authorities may also impose specific obligations as a condition of the MA. Such risk- minimization measures or post-authorization obligations may include additional safety monitoring, more frequent submission of PSURs, or the conduct of additional clinical trials or post-authorization safety studies.

In the EU, the advertising and promotion of medicinal products are subject to both EU and EU Member States’laws governing promotion of medicinal products, interactions with physicians and other healthcare professionals, misleading and comparative advertising and unfair commercial practices. General requirements for advertising and promotion of medicinal products, such as direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription medicinal products are established in EU law. However, the details are governed by regulations in individual EU Member States and can differ from one country to another. For example, applicable laws require that promotional materials and advertising in relation to medicinal products comply with the product’s Summary of Product Characteristics, or SmPC, which may require approval by the competent national authorities in connection with an MA. The SmPC is the document that provides information to physicians concerning the safe and effective use of the product. Promotional activity that does not comply with the SmPC is considered off-label and is prohibited in the EU.

Pricing and Reimbursement in the European Union

Governments influence the price of medicinal products in the European Union through their pricing and reimbursement rules and control of national healthcare systems that fund a large part of the cost of those products to consumers. Some jurisdictions operate positive and negative list systems under which products may only be marketed once a reimbursement price has been agreed. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval, some of these countries may require the completion of clinical trials that compare the cost-effectiveness of a particular product candidate to currently available therapies. This Health Technology Assessment, or HTA, process is the procedure according to which the assessment of the public health impact, therapeutic impact and the economic and societal impact of use of a given medicinal product in the national healthcare systems of the individual country is conducted. The outcome of HTA regarding specific medicinal products will often influence the pricing and reimbursement status granted to these medicinal products by the competent authorities of individual EU Member States. In December 2021, Regulation No 2021/2282 on Health Technology Assessment, or HTA Regulation, was adopted. The HTA Regulation is intended to boost cooperation among EU Member States in assessing health technologies, including new medicinal products, and providing the basis for cooperation at EU level for joint clinical assessments in these areas. When it enters into application in 2025, the HTA Regulation will be intended to harmonize the clinical benefit assessment of HTA across the European Union. Other EU Member States allow companies to fix their own prices for medicines, but monitor and control company profits. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription medicines, has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products.

Brexit and the Regulatory Framework in the United Kingdom

The United Kingdom’s, or UK, withdrawal from the EU on January 31, 2020, commonly referred to as Brexit, has changed the regulatory relationship between the UK and the EU. The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, or MHRA, is now the UK’s standalone regulator for medicinal products and medical devices. Great Britain (England, Scotland and Wales) is now a third country to the EU. Northern Ireland will, with regard to EU regulations, continue to follow the EU regulatory rules for now.

The UK regulatory framework in relation to clinical trials is governed by the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Regulations 2004, as amended, which is derived from the CTD, as implemented into UK national law through secondary legislation. On January 17, 2022, the MHRA launched an eight-week consultation on reframing the UK legislation for clinical trials, and which aimed to streamline clinical trials approvals, enable innovation, enhance clinical trials transparency, enable greater risk proportionality, and promote patient and public involvement in clinical trials.The UK Government published its response to the consultation on March 21, 2023 confirming that it would bring forward changes to the legislation. These resulting legislative amendments will determine how closely the UK regulations will align with the CTR. In October 2023, the MHRA announced a new Notification Scheme for clinical trials which enables a more streamlined and risk-proportionate approach to initial clinical trial applications for Phase 4 and low-risk Phase 3 clinical trial applications.

Marketing authorizations in the UK are governed by the Human Medicines Regulations (SI 2012/1916), as amended. Since January 1, 2021, an applicant for the EU centralized procedure marketing authorization can no longer be established in the UK. As a result, since this date, companies established in the UK cannot use the EU centralized procedure and instead must follow one of the UK national authorization procedures or one of the remaining post-Brexit international cooperation procedures to obtain a marketing authorization to market products in the UK. All existing EU marketing authorizations for centrally authorized products were automatically converted or grandfathered into UK marketing authorization, effective in Great Britain only, free of charge on January 1, 2021, unless the marketing authorization holder opted-out of this possibility. Northern Ireland currently remains within the scope of EU authorizations in relation to centrally authorized medicinal products. Accordingly, until the Windsor Framework is implemented in Northern Ireland on January 1, 2025, products falling within the scope of the EU centralized procedure can only be authorized through UK national authorization procedures in Great Britain.

The MHRA has also introduced changes to national marketing authorization procedures. This includes introduction of procedures to prioritize access to new medicines that will benefit patients, including a 150-day assessment route, a rolling review procedure and the International Recognition Procedure. Since January 1, 2024, the MHRA may rely on the International Recognition Procedure, or IRP, when reviewing certain types of marketing authorization applications. This procedure is available for applicants for marketing authorization who have already received an authorization for the same product from a reference regulator. These include the FDA, the EMA, and national competent authorities of individual EEA countries. A positive opinion from the EMA and CHMP, or a positive end of procedure outcome from the mutual recognition or decentralized procedures are considered to be authorizations for the purposes of the IRP.

There is no pre-marketing authorization orphan designation for medicinal products in the UK. Instead, the MHRA reviews applications for orphan designation in parallel to the corresponding marketing authorization application. The criteria are essentially the same as those in the EU, but have been tailored for the market. This includes the criterion that prevalence of the condition in Great Britain, rather than the EU, must not be more than five in 10,000. Upon the grant of a marketing authorization with orphan status, the medicinal product will benefit from up to 10 years of market exclusivity from similar products in the approved orphan indication. The start of this market exclusivity period will be set from the date of first approval of the product in Great Britain.

C. Organizational Structure.

A full list of our subsidiaries and the address of their registered offices as of December 31, 2023 is set forth below.

D. Property, Plants and Equipment.

We lease approximately 4,000 sq ft of office space in London, England for our corporate headquarters and other general and administrative functions under a lease with a term through September 2025. We also lease regional offices and laboratory space in Berlin, Germany (two leases: rolling contract basis with either party being able to end the lease upon 11.5 months’ prior notice) and Hoboken, New Jersey, USA (seven leases: current lease end dates of February 2024, April 2024, August 2024, October 2024, with either party being able to end the lease upon three months' prior notice).

We believe that our current facilities are adequate to meet our needs for the near future and that suitable additional or alternative space will be available on commercially reasonable terms to accommodate our foreseeable future operations.

Environmental Issues

For information on environmental issues that may affect our utilization of our facilities, see “Item 3.D. Risk Factors ⸺ Risks Related to Our Business Operations and Compliance with Government Regulations ⸺ If we fail to comply with environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, we could become subject to fines or penalties or incur costs that could have a material adverse effect on the success of our business.”

ITEM 4A: UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

None.

ITEM 5: OPERATING AND FINANCIAL REVIEW AND PROSPECTS

A. OPERATING RESULTS

You should read the following discussion and analysis of financial condition and operating results and our consolidated financial statements and the related notes to those financial statements included elsewhere in this Annual Report, which have been prepared in accordance with IFRS, as issued by the IASB.

The statements in this discussion with respect to our plans and strategy for our business, including expectations regarding our future liquidity and capital resources and other non-historical statements, are forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, including the risks and uncertainties described in the section of this Annual Report titled “Risk Factors.” Our actual results may differ materially from those contained in or implied by any forward-looking statements.

Overview

Silence Therapeutics plc (“we”, “us”, “our”, “the Company” or “Silence”) is a biotechnology company focused on discovering and developing novel molecules incorporating short interfering ribonucleic acid, or siRNA, to inhibit the expression of specific target genes thought to play a role in the pathology of diseases with significant unmet medical need. Our siRNA molecules are designed to harness the body’s natural mechanism of RNA interference, or RNAi, by specifically binding to and degrading messenger RNA, or mRNA, molecules that encode specific targeted disease-associated proteins in a cell. By degrading the message that encodes the disease-associated protein, the production of that protein is reduced, and its level of activity is lowered. In the field of RNAi therapeutics, this reduction of disease-associated protein production and activity is referred to as “gene silencing.” Our proprietary mRNAi GOLD™ (GalNAc Oligonucleotide Discovery) platform consists of precision engineered product candidates designed to accurately target and ‘silence’ specific disease-associated genes in the liver. Using our mRNAi GOLD™ platform, we have generated siRNA product candidates both for our internal development pipeline as well as for out-licensed programs with third-party collaborators. Our wholly owned pipeline is currently focused in three therapeutic areas of high unmet need: cardiovascular disease, hematology and rare diseases.

Zerlasiran (SLN360) is our wholly owned siRNA designed to lower the body's production of apolipoprotein(a), a key component of lipoprotein(a), or Lp(a), that has been associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events. High Lp(a) is a genetically determined cardiovascular risk factor affecting up to 20% of the world’s population and is associated with a high risk of heart attack, stroke and aortic stenosis. There are currently no approved medicines that selectively lower Lp(a). In February 2022, we reported positive results from the single-ascending dose portion of the APOLLO phase 1 program evaluating zerlasiran in 32 healthy adults with high Lp(a) ≥150 nmol/L. In the single dose trial, participants in the top two zerlasiran single dose groups (300 mg and 600 mg) were observed to have experienced up to a 96% and 98% median reduction in Lp(a) levels, respectively, and median reductions of up to 71% and 81% from baseline persisted at 150 days. Further analysis showed median time-averaged Lp(a) reductions over 150 days exceeded 80% in the zerlasiran 300 mg and 600 mg dose groups. At day 365, some participants still exhibited substantial knockdown of Lp(a) to approximately 50% of baseline. Zerlasiran was well tolerated with no serious safety concerns reported. In November 2023, we reported positive topline results from the multiple dose portion of the APOLLO program in 36 adults with baseline Lp(a) levels ≥150 nmol/L and stable atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). In the multiple dose trial, zerlasiran (200 mg, 300 mg and 450 mg) was administered twice subcutaneously at two different dosing intervals. Data demonstrated a significant reduction from baseline in Lp(a) of up to 99% at 90 days following injection of repeated doses. Lp(a) levels remained approximately 90% lower than baseline at 201 days (end of treatment period) at the two highest doses. A dose dependent reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL cholesterol) and apolipoprotein B (ApoB) was also observed. Zerlasiran was well tolerated; no clinically important safety concerns were identified. Zerlasiran is currently being evaluated in the fully enrolled ALPACAR-360 phase 2 study in patients with Lp(a) levels 125 nmol/L at high risk of ASCVD events. We expect to report topline 36-week data in the first quarter of 2024 (primary endpoint) and topline 48-week data in the second quarter of 2024. We are currently finalizing the design of our phase 3 clinical outcomes trial. We continue to engage in global partnership discussions for future zerlasiran development and for potential future commercialization.

Divesiran (SLN124) is our wholly owned siRNA designed to inhibit TMPRSS6 expression in the liver to raise hepcidin, a peptide hormone that is the master regulator of systemic iron balance. Divesiran has shown preclinical potential in several hematological disorders. Furthermore, divesiran has demonstrated proof of mechanism in the GEMINI phase 1 trial in healthy volunteers completed in May 2021. In the GEMINI study, divesiran was observed to

increase average hepcidin approximately four-fold and reduce serum iron by approximately 50% after a single dose with effects persisting for at least two months. Data were presented at the American Society of Hematology (ASH) 2021 Annual Meeting and published in the American Journal of Hematology in July 2023. Divesiran is currently being studied in the SANRECO phase 1/2 trial in patients with polycythemia vera (PV). Divesiran has FDA Fast Track and orphan disease designations for PV. We plan to report data from the phase 1 portion of the study in the first half of 2024.

The potential of our mRNAi GOLD™ platform has been validated through ongoing research and development collaborations with leading pharmaceutical companies, such as AstraZeneca, Mallinckrodt and Hansoh. These collaborations collectively represent up to 14 pipeline programs and approximately $5.5 billion in potential milestones plus royalties.

We believe the potential for our mRNAi GOLD™ platform to address disease-associated genes in the liver is substantial. Only around one percent of the approximately 14,000 liver expressed genes have been targeted by publicly known siRNAs. Once in the clinic, early-stage GalNAC-conjugated RNAi programs have shown a much greater likelihood of advancement from the current phase of development compared to the pharmaceutical industry average. We aim to maximize our mRNAi GOLD™ platform by advancing both our proprietary and partnered pipelines.

Executive Summary

Our results of operations for the full fiscal year ended December 31, 2023 reflect the following:

Zerlasiran for cardiovascular disease

Divesiran for hematological conditions

Partnered Program Updates

Corporate Updates

Post Period Highlights

Collaboration Agreement with AstraZeneca

In March 2020, we entered into a collaboration agreement with AstraZeneca to discover, develop and commercialize siRNA therapeutics for the treatment of cardiovascular, renal, metabolic and respiratory diseases. Under this agreement, AstraZeneca made an upfront cash payment to us of $20.0 million in May 2020. AstraZeneca made an additional unconditional cash payment to us of $40.0 million which was received in May 2021. In March 2020, an affiliate of AstraZeneca also subscribed for 4,276,580 new ordinary shares for an aggregate subscription price of $20.0 million.

The collaboration covers five targets initially, with AstraZeneca having the option to extend the collaboration to a further five targets. AstraZeneca has agreed to pay us $10.0 million upon the exercise of each option to collaborate on an additional target. In May 2023, AstraZeneca nominated the first product candidate under our collaboration, triggering a $10 million option fee to us to advance development on an undisclosed program. For each target selected, we will be eligible to receive up to $140.0 million in potential milestone payments upon the achievement of milestones relating to the initiation of specified clinical trials, the acceptance of specified regulatory filings and the first commercial sale in specified jurisdictions. For each target selected, we will also be eligible to receive up to $250.0 million in potential commercial milestone payments, upon the achievement of specified annual net sales levels, as well as tiered royalties as a percentage of net sales ranging from the high single digits to the low double digits.

Collaboration Agreement with Mallinckrodt

In July 2019, we entered into a collaboration agreement with Mallinckrodt to develop and commercialize RNAi drug targets designed to silence the complement cascade in complement-mediated disorders. In connection with the execution of this agreement, Mallinckrodt made an upfront cash payment to us of $20.0 million (equivalent to £16.4 million as of the payment date). Under a separate subscription agreement, Cache Holdings Limited, a wholly owned subsidiary of Mallinckrodt, concurrently subscribed for 5,062,167 new ordinary shares for an aggregate subscription price of $5.0 million (equivalent to £4.0 million as of the payment date). Under the agreement, we granted Mallinckrodt an exclusive worldwide license to our C3 targeting program, SLN501, with options to license two additional undisclosed complement-mediated disease targets from us. In July 2020, Mallinckrodt exercised options on the two additional complement targets.

In March 2023, we reacquired exclusive worldwide rights from Mallinckrodt to the two undisclosed preclinical complement targets. Under the terms of the modified agreement, we did not make any upfront payment to get the two assets back and will potentially pay future success-based milestones and low single digit royalties on net sales if the projects advance. SLN501, the C3 targeting program, remained under the original collaboration agreement. In March 2024, Mallinckrodt notified us that they will not pursue further development of SLN501 following the completion of the phase 1 clinical trial. This will conclude all activities and commitments under the collaboration agreement.

Collaboration Agreement with Hansoh

On October 15, 2021, we announced a collaboration agreement with Hansoh, one of the leading biopharmaceutical companies in China, to develop siRNAs for three undisclosed targets leveraging our proprietary mRNAi GOLD™ platform. Under the terms of the agreement, we retain exclusive rights to the first two targets in all territories except the China Region (Greater China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan). Hansoh has the exclusive option to license rights to those two targets in the China Region following the completion of phase 1 studies. We will be responsible for all activities up to option exercise and will retain responsibility for development outside the China region post phase 1 studies. Hansoh will also have the exclusive option to license global rights to a third target at the point of IND filing. Hansoh will be responsible for all development activities post option exercise for the third target. Hansoh made a $16 million upfront payment to us in December 2021. We achieved our first $2 million research milestone payment in the Hansoh collaboration in April 2022. In 2023, we achieved two additional preclinical milestones and received $4 million from the collaboration. We are eligible to receive up to $1.3 billion in additional development, regulatory and commercial milestones. We will also receive royalties tiered from low double-digit to mid-teens on Hansoh net product sales.

Financial Operations Overview

Revenue

We do not have any approved products. Accordingly, we have not generated any revenue from product sales, and we do not expect to generate any revenue from the sale of any products unless and until we obtain regulatory approvals for, and commercialize any of, our product candidates. In the future, we will seek to generate revenue primarily from product sales and, potentially, regional or global strategic collaborations with third parties.

Under our collaboration agreement with Mallinckrodt, we received an upfront cash payment of $20.0 million in 2019 (£16.4 million as of the payment date) and are eligible to receive specified development, regulatory and commercial milestone payments. We received a milestone payment of $2.0 million (£1.7 million as of the payment date) during the year ended December 31, 2020. In February 2021, we initiated work on the third complement target which triggered another $2 million (£1.5 million) research milestone payment. In April 2021, we also received $2 million (£1.5 million) for the second research milestone related to the first complement 3 target. During the year ended December 31, 2022 we received milestone payments totaling $3.0 million (£2.2 million). During the year ended December 31, 2023 we received no milestone payments. In addition to these potential payments, Mallinckrodt has agreed to fund some of our research personnel and preclinical development costs. We recognize the upfront payment, milestone payments, payments for personnel costs and other research funding payments over time, in accordance with IFRS 15 para 35 c). During the year ended December 31, 2023, we recognized a total of £10.5 million in revenue under this agreement.

In March 2023, the Company reacquired exclusive worldwide rights to two preclinical siRNA assets under its Mallinckrodt collaboration, which resulted in a modification of the agreement. No additional performance obligations were identified as a result of the modification as there were no additional goods or services to be provided by the Company and the modification resulted in the partially satisfied performance obligations relating to the two reacquired targets becoming fully satisfied as the Company was no longer obligated to develop these targets. SLN501, the C3 targeting program, remained under the original collaboration agreement through March 2024. The Company has accounted for the modification as if it were part of the existing contract as the remaining services to be delivered form part of a single performance obligation that is partially satisfied at the date of contract modification. The effect of the contract modification was that the consideration originally received for the two preclinical siRNA assets was reallocated to SLN501. The Company has recognized the effect of the contract modification on the measure of progress towards complete satisfaction of the SLN501 performance obligation, and recognized an adjustment to revenue at the date of the contract modification on a cumulative catch-up basis. The Company recognized £8.0 million on the contract modification date. In relation to the reacquired targets, the two preclinical siRNA assets were recognized at fair value. The fair value of those assets has been determined to be nil. Under the modification, the Company agreed to pay future success-based milestones and low single digit royalties on net sales if the projects advance. The Company will recognize these variable success-based milestones as an intangible asset at cost when triggered. Any royalties payable will be expensed in cost of sales.

Under our collaboration agreement with AstraZeneca, we received an upfront cash payment of £17.1 million ($20.0 million) and an additional payment of £30.8 million ($40.0 million) in May 2021. We are also eligible to receive specified development and commercial milestone payments as well as tiered royalties on net sales, if any. During the year ended December 31, 2023 we received milestone payments totaling $10.0 million (£7.9 million). We recognize the upfront payment and milestone payments over time, in accordance with IFRS 15 para 35 c). During the year ended December 31, 2023, we recognized a total of £13.7 million in revenue under this agreement.

We entered into a collaboration agreement with Hansoh on October 15, 2021. We received a $16 million (equivalent to approximately £11.9 million based on the exchange rate at the payment date and $14.4 million or £10.7 million, net of taxes) upfront payment to us in December 2021. We are eligible to receive up to $1.3 billion in additional development, regulatory and commercial milestones. We will also receive royalties tiered from low double-digit to mid-teens on Hansoh net product sales. During the year ended December 31, 2022, we achieved milestone payments totaling $2.0 million (£1.5 million). During the year ended December 31, 2023, we achieved milestone payments totaling $4.0 million (£3.2 million). We recognize the upfront payment and milestone payments over time, in accordance with IFRS 15 para 35 c). During the year ended December 31, 2023, we recognized a total of £0.6 million in revenue under this agreement.

In December 2018, we entered into a settlement and license agreement with Alnylam Pharmaceuticals Inc., or Alnylam, pursuant to which we settled outstanding patent litigation with Alnylam related to its RNAi product ONPATTRO. As part of the settlement, we license specified patents to Alnylam, and Alnylam pays us a tiered royalty of up to one percent of net sales of ONPATTRO in the European Union. We were eligible to receive these royalties until December 2023. We invoice Alnylam quarterly in arrears based on sales data for that quarter as reported to us by Alnylam. Royalty revenue is recognized based on the level of sales when the related sales occur. During the year ended December 31, 2023, we recognized a total of £0.6 million in royalty income from Alnylam.

Cost of sales

Cost of sales consists of research and development expenditure that is directly related to work carried out on revenue generating contracts. This includes salary costs that are apportioned based on time spent by employees working on these contracts as well as costs of materials and costs incurred under agreements with CROs.

Operating Expenses

We classify our operating expenses into two categories: research and development costs and general and administrative expenses. Personnel costs, including salaries, benefits, bonuses and share-based payment expenses, comprise a significant component of each of these expense categories. We allocate expenses associated with personnel costs based on the function performed by the respective employees.

Research and Development Costs

The largest component of our total operating expenses since inception has been costs related to our research and development activities, including the preclinical and clinical development of our product candidates. We expense research and development costs as they are incurred and classify them as contracted development, personnel and other.

Our contracted development costs primarily consists of:

Our personnel research and development expense primarily consists of:

Our other research and development costs primarily consists of

The successful development of our product candidates is highly uncertain. Product candidates in later stages of clinical development generally have higher development costs than those in earlier stages of clinical development, primarily due to the increased size and duration of later-stage clinical trials. Accordingly, we expect research and development costs to increase significantly for the foreseeable future as programs progress.

The duration, costs and timing of clinical trials and development of our product candidates will depend on a variety of factors, including:

We have not historically tracked research and development expenses on a program-by-program basis for our preclinical product candidates.

General and Administrative Expenses

General and administrative expenses consist of personnel costs, allocated expenses and other expenses for outside professional services, including legal, audit, tax and accounting services, public relations and investor relations

services. Personnel costs consist of salaries, bonuses, benefits, recruitment costs and share-based payment expenses for personnel in executive, finance, business development and other support functions. Other administrative expenses include office space-related costs not otherwise allocated to research and development costs, insurance expenses, and costs of our information systems and costs for compliance with the day-to-day requirements of being a listed public company in the United States. We anticipate that our administrative expenses will continue to increase in the future as we increase our headcount to support our continued research and development and potential commercialization of our product candidates. We also expect to continue incurring additional expenses as a public company in the United States, including expenses related to compliance with the rules and regulations of the SEC and Nasdaq, additional insurance expenses, expenses related to investor relations activities and other administrative and professional services.

Finance and Other Income (Expense)

Finance and other income primarily relates to interest earned on our cash, cash equivalents and short-term deposits, as well as accretion earned on our U.S. treasury bills. Finance and other expense primarily relates to lease liability interest expense and foreign exchange losses. Foreign exchange gains and losses relate to cash held in foreign currencies (primarily Euros).

Taxation

We are subject to corporate taxation in the United Kingdom, United States and Germany. Due to the nature of our business, we have generated losses since inception. Our income tax credit recognized represents the sum of the research and development, or R&D, tax credits recoverable in the United Kingdom. The U.K. R&D tax credit, as described below, is fully refundable to us. We have recorded the entire benefit from the U.K. R&D tax credit as a credit to “Taxation.”

As a company that carries out extensive research and development activities, we currently benefit from the U.K. research and development tax credit regime for small or medium-sized enterprises, or SMEs. Under the SME regime, we are able to surrender some of the trading losses that arise from qualifying R&D activities for a cash rebate of up to 18.6% of such qualifying R&D expenditures (starting on April 1, 2023, such rebate was reduced from 33.4%). From 1 April 2021, for credit claims in excess of £20,000, the amount of payable credit that a qualifying loss-making SME business can receive through SME research and development relief in any one year will be capped at £20,000 plus three times the company’s and certain connected parties’ total pay-as-you-earn and National Insurance Contributions liability for that year, unless the company actively manages its intellectual property and does not outsource more than 15% of its R&D to a related party. Based on this rule, we expect the 2023 R&D tax claim to be restricted. Qualifying expenditures are net of any revenue contribution and largely comprise employment costs for research staff, materials, outsourced CRO costs and R&D consulting costs incurred as part of research projects, clinical trial and manufacturing costs, including outsourced CRO costs, employment costs for relevant staff and consumables incurred as part of research and development projects. Certain subcontracted qualifying research and development expenditures are eligible for a cash rebate of up to 14.1% (starting on April 1, 2023, such rebate was reduced from 21.7%). A large portion of costs relating to our research and development, clinical trials and manufacturing activities are eligible for inclusion within these tax credit cash rebate claims. We recognize research and development tax credits when receipt is probable.

Amendments to the U.K. R&D tax credit regime that are contained in the Finance Bill currently proceeding through the U.K. Parliament will increase the cash rebate that may be claimed from such date to 26.97% of qualifying expenditure, if we qualify as an “R&D-intensive SME” for an accounting period (broadly, a loss making SME whose qualifying R&D expenditure represents 40% (or, from April 1, 2024, 30%) or more of its total expenditure for that accounting period). These amendments will also with effect from April 1, 2024 (i) (unless limited exceptions apply) introduce restrictions on the tax relief that can be claimed for expenditure incurred on sub-contracted R&D activities or externally provided workers, where such sub-contracted activities are not carried out in the U.K. or such workers are not subject to U.K. payroll taxes, and (ii) merge the SME Program and the RDEC Program into a single scheme. If such proposals are implemented as currently provided in the Finance Bill, and we do not qualify as an R&D-intensive SME, we will either cease to be able to claim cash rebates in respect of our R&D activities, or only be able to receive such cash rebates at a significantly lower rate than at present. These and other potential future changes to the U.K. R&D tax relief programs may mean we no longer qualify or have a material impact on the extent to which we can make claims or benefit from them.

Unsurrendered U.K. tax losses may be carried forward indefinitely to be offset against future taxable profits, subject to numerous utilization criteria and restrictions. The amount that can be offset each year is limited to £5.0 million plus an incremental 50% of U.K. taxable profits. After accounting for tax credits receivable, we had accumulated tax losses for carry forward in the United Kingdom of £155.8 million as of December 31, 2023 (£124.3 million as of December 31, 2022). However, in the event of a change in ownership of a U.K. company, certain provisions may apply to restrict the utilization of carried forward tax losses in future periods. These provisions apply where there is a major change in the nature or conduct of a trade in connection with the change in ownership. For the avoidance of doubt, we do not recognize a deferred tax asset in respect of the accumulated tax losses. In addition to our accumulated tax losses in the United Kingdom, we also had £42.7 million of accumulated tax losses as of December 31, 2023 (£43.6 million as of December 31, 2022) related to our operations in Germany for corporate income taxes. We also had £41.4 million of accumulated losses related to trade taxes in our German entity (£43.6 million as of December 31, 2022). We had had a foreign tax expense in Germany of £0.4 million (2022: £0.4 million). Tax losses in the U.S. were negligible.

In the event we generate revenues in the future, we may benefit from the U.K. “patent box” regime that allows profits attributable to revenues from patents or patented products to be taxed at an effective rate of 10%.

Value Added Tax, or VAT, is charged on all qualifying goods and services by VAT-registered businesses. Where applicable, an amount of 20% of goods and services is added to all sales invoices and is payable to the U.K. tax authorities. Similarly, VAT paid on purchase invoices is reclaimable from the U.K. tax authorities.

Results of Operations

Comparison of the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021

The following tables summarize the results of our operations for the years ended December 31, 2023, 2022 and 2021.

Consolidated Income statements