ACELYRIN, INC. (SLRN) Risk Factors

We are an "emerging growth company" as defined in the JOBS Act. For as long as we continue to be an emerging growth company, we may take advantage of exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies, including (i) not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, (ii) reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements and (iii) exemptions from the requirements of holding nonbinding advisory stockholder votes on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not approved previously. We could be an emerging growth company for up to five years following the completion of our May 2023 initial public offering, although circumstances could cause us to lose that status earlier, including if we are deemed to be a "large accelerated filer," which occurs when the market value of our shares that is held by non-affiliates equals or exceeds $700.0 million as of the prior June 30, or if we have total annual gross revenue of $1.24 billion or more during any fiscal year before that time, in which cases we would no longer be an emerging growth company as of the December 31 of such year, or if we issue more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt during any three-year period before that time, in which case we would no longer be an emerging growth company immediately. Under the JOBS Act, emerging growth companies can also delay adopting new or revised accounting standards until such time as those standards apply to private companies. We have elected to take advantage of the benefits of this extended transition period. Our financial statements may therefore not be comparable to those of companies that comply with such new or revised accounting standards. Until the date that we are no longer an "emerging growth company" or affirmatively and irrevocably opt out of the exemption provided by Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act, upon issuance of a new or revised accounting standard that applies to our financial statements and that has a different effective date for public and private companies, we will disclose the date on which adoption is required for non-emerging growth companies and the date on which we will adopt the recently issued accounting standard.

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

Our restated certificate of incorporation, to the fullest extent permitted by law, provides that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the exclusive forum for: any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf; any action asserting a breach of fiduciary duty; any action asserting a claim against us arising pursuant to the DGCL, our restated certificate of incorporation, or our restated bylaws; or any action asserting a claim that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine. This exclusive forum provision does not apply to suits brought to enforce a duty or liability created by the Exchange Act. This choice of forum provision may limit a stockholder's ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or any of our directors, officers, or other employees, or the underwriters of any offering giving rise to such claims, which may discourage lawsuits with respect to such claims. Alternatively, if a court were to find the choice of forum provisions contained in our restated certificate of incorporation to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Section 22 of the Securities Act creates concurrent jurisdiction for federal and state courts over all claims brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Securities Act or the rules and regulations thereunder. Our restated bylaws provide that the federal district courts of the United States of America will, to the fullest extent permitted by law, be the exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act, or the Federal Forum Provision, including for all causes of action asserted against any defendant named in such complaint. For the avoidance of doubt, this provision is intended to benefit and may be enforced by us, our officers and directors, the underwriters to any public offering giving rise to such complaint, and any other professional entity whose profession gives authority to a statement made by that person or entity and who has prepared or certified any part of the documents underlying the offering. Our decision to adopt a Federal Forum Provision followed a decision by the Supreme Court of the State of Delaware holding that such provisions are facially valid under Delaware law. While federal or other state courts may not follow the holding of the Delaware Supreme Court or may determine that the Federal Forum Provision should be enforced in a particular case, application of the Federal Forum Provision means that suits brought by our stockholders to enforce any duty or liability created by the Securities Act must be brought in federal court and cannot be brought in state court, and our stockholders cannot waive compliance with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder. Section 27 of the Exchange Act creates exclusive federal jurisdiction over all claims brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Exchange Act or the rules and regulations thereunder. In addition, neither the exclusive forum provision nor the Federal Forum Provision applies to suits brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Exchange Act. Accordingly, actions by our stockholders to enforce any duty or liability created by the Exchange Act or the rules and regulations thereunder must be brought in federal court, and our stockholders cannot waive compliance with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder. Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring or holding any interest in any of our securities shall be deemed to have notice of and consented to our exclusive forum provisions in our restated bylaws, including the Federal Forum Provision. These provisions may limit a stockholders' ability, and/or may result in increased costs for a stockholder, to bring such a claim in a judicial forum of their choosing for disputes with us or our directors, officers, other employees or agents. That may discourage lawsuits against us and our directors, officers, other employees or agents.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation authorizes our board of directors, without the approval of our stockholders, to issue shares of preferred stock, subject to limitations prescribed therein or by applicable law, rules and regulations; to establish the number of shares to be included in each such series of preferred stock; and to fix the designation, powers, preferences and rights of each such series and the qualifications, limitations or restrictions thereof. The powers, preferences and rights of these additional series of convertible preferred stock may be senior to or on parity with our common stock, which may reduce our common stock's value.

We are subject to the periodic reporting requirements of the Exchange Act. We designed our disclosure controls and procedures to provide reasonable assurance that information we must disclose in reports we file or submit under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to management, and recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the SEC. Our disclosure controls and procedures may not be effective. Any disclosure controls and procedures, no matter how well-conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met because of the inherent limitations in all control systems. While our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer and Chief Business Officer have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of June 30, 2024, we have in the past identified, and could in the future identify, a significant deficiency or material weakness in internal control over financial reporting or fail to comply with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. In any event, these inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. For example, our directors or executive officers could inadvertently fail to disclose a new relationship or arrangement causing us to fail to make any related party transaction disclosures. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people or by an unauthorized override of the controls. Accordingly, because of the inherent limitations in our control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected. In addition, we do not have a formal risk management program for identifying and addressing risks to our business in other areas.

We have never declared nor paid dividends on our capital stock. We currently intend to retain all of our future earnings, if any, to finance the growth and development, operation and expansion of our business and we do not anticipate declaring or paying any dividends in the foreseeable future. As a result, capital appreciation of our common stock, which may never occur, will be our stockholders' sole source of gain on investment for the foreseeable future. General Risk Factors

We expect our operating results to be subject to quarterly and annual fluctuations which may, in turn, cause the price of our common stock to fluctuate substantially. Our net loss and other operating results will be affected by numerous factors, including: - variations in the level of expense related to the ongoing development of lonigutamab, izokibep or future development programs;- results and timing of ongoing and future preclinical studies and clinical trials, or the addition or termination thereof;- the timing of payments we may make or receive under existing license and collaboration arrangements or the termination or modification thereof;- our execution of any strategic transactions, including acquisitions, collaborations, licenses or similar arrangements, and the timing and amount of payments we may make or receive in connection with such transactions;- any intellectual property infringement lawsuit or opposition, interference or cancellation proceeding in which we may become involved;- recruitment and departures of key personnel;- if any of our product candidates receives regulatory approval, the terms of such approval and market acceptance and demand for such products;- regulatory developments affecting our product candidates or those of our competitors;- fluctuations in stock-based compensation expense;- the continuing impact of negative macroeconomic trends, such as high rates of inflation, supply chain disruptions and geopolitical instability, and the COVID-19 pandemic on our business and operations;- our ability to achieve the expected cost benefits of the Restructuring Plan on the expected timeline, or at all; and - changes in general market and economic conditions. If our quarterly or annual operating results fall below the expectations of investors or securities analysts or any forecasts or guidance we may provide to the market, the price of our common stock could decline substantially. Such a stock price decline could occur even when we have met any previously publicly stated guidance we may provide. We believe that quarterly or annual comparisons of our financial results are not necessarily meaningful and should not be relied upon as an indication of our future performance.

We previously identified material weaknesses in the design and operating effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting related to the fact that we lacked a sufficient number of professionals to consistently establish appropriate authorities and responsibilities in pursuit of our financial reporting objectives. The lack of sufficient number of professionals further contributed to additional material weaknesses in the design and maintenance of: (i) an effective risk assessment process at a precise enough level to identify new and evolving risks of material misstatement in the consolidated financial statements and (ii) effective controls over the segregation of duties related to journal entries and account reconciliations. Specifically, certain personnel had the ability to both (i) create and post journal entries within the Company's general ledger system and (ii) prepare and review account reconciliations without a review performed by someone without conflicting duties. A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Through our hiring of necessary personnel and testing of related internal controls for design and operating effectiveness, we have determined that the material weakness related to insufficient accounting personnel was remediated as of December 31, 2023 and that the material weaknesses in the design and maintenance of an effective risk assessment process and controls over segregation of duties were remediated as of June 30, 2024. Although we have remediated the material weaknesses, there is no guarantee that we will not identify or experience additional material weaknesses. If we identify new material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting, if we are unable to comply with the disclosure and attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in a timely manner, if we are unable to conclude that our internal control over financial reporting is effective, or if our independent registered public accounting firm is unable to conclude that our internal control over financial reporting is effective when we are no longer an emerging growth company, investors may lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports and the market price of our common stock could be negatively affected. As a result, we could also become subject to investigations by the Nasdaq Global Select Market, the SEC or other regulatory authorities, and become subject to litigation from investors and stockholders, which could harm our reputation and financial condition or divert financial and management resources from our regular business activities.

We previously identified material weaknesses in the design and operating effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting related to the fact that we lacked a sufficient number of professionals to consistently establish appropriate authorities and responsibilities in pursuit of our financial reporting objectives. The lack of sufficient number of professionals further contributed to additional material weaknesses in the design and maintenance of: (i) an effective risk assessment process at a precise enough level to identify new and evolving risks of material misstatement in the consolidated financial statements and (ii) effective controls over the segregation of duties related to journal entries and account reconciliations. Specifically, certain personnel had the ability to both (i) create and post journal entries within the company's general ledger system and (ii) prepare and review account reconciliations without a review performed by someone without conflicting duties. A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Through our hiring of necessary personnel and testing of related internal controls for design and operating effectiveness, we have determined that the material weakness related to insufficient accounting personnel was remediated as of December 31, 2023. However, we determined that the other identified material weaknesses, in the design and maintenance of an effective risk assessment process and controls over segregation of duties, remained unremediated as of December 31, 2023. The controls we have implemented, described further below, have not operated for a sufficient period of time and management has not yet concluded, through testing, that such controls are effective. Such material weaknesses could result in a misstatement of substantially all of our accounts or disclosures that would result in a material misstatement of our annual or interim financial statements that would not be prevented or detected. We have taken and will continue to take certain measures to remediate the material weaknesses described above. We designed and implemented a comprehensive risk assessment process to identify and design our control activities and we continue to assess risks on a continuous basis to timely identify new exposures or risk categories as business practices change. We also designed and implemented preventive and detective controls over the segregation of duties related to journal entries and account reconciliations. Specifically, we restricted the ability for one individual to both (i) create and post a journal entry in the general ledger and (ii) prepare and review account reconciliations. While we believe these measures will remediate the material weaknesses identified and strengthen our internal control over financial reporting, the material weaknesses will not be considered remediated until the controls described above operate for a sufficient period of time and management has concluded, through testing, that these controls are effective. The measures we have taken to date, may not be sufficient to remediate the material weaknesses we have identified or avoid potential future material weaknesses. If the steps we take do not correct these material weaknesses in a timely manner, we will be unable to conclude that we maintain effective internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, there could continue to be a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our financial statements would not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. If we fail to remediate our existing material weaknesses or continue to identify new material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting, if we are unable to comply with the disclosure and attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in a timely manner, if we are unable to conclude that our internal control over financial reporting is effective, or if our independent registered public accounting firm is unable to conclude that our internal control over financial reporting is effective when we are no longer an emerging growth company, investors may lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports and the market price of our common stock could be negatively affected. As a result, we could also become subject to investigations by the Nasdaq Global Select Market, the SEC or other regulatory authorities, and become subject to litigation from investors and stockholders, which could harm our reputation and financial condition or divert financial and management resources from our regular business activities.

We have incurred substantial losses during our history and do not expect to become profitable in the near future, and we may never achieve profitability. As of December 31, 2023, we had federal NOL carryforwards of $92.7 million and state NOL carryforwards of $6.8 million. Under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the Code), our U.S. federal net operating losses will not expire and may be carried forward indefinitely but the deductibility of federal net operating losses is limited to no more than 80% of current year taxable income (with certain adjustments). In addition, under Sections 382 and 383 of the Code, if a corporation undergoes an "ownership change," generally defined as a greater than 50 percentage point change (by value) in its equity ownership by certain stockholders over a three-year period, the corporation's ability to use its pre-change NOL carryforwards and other pre-change tax attributes to offset its post-change income or taxes may be limited. We have experienced ownership changes in the past, including in 2023. We completed a Section 382 analysis through December 31, 2023, and concluded that although an ownership change had occurred, the Company's net operating losses and credits were substantially free of limitations as of December 31, 2023. Similar provisions of state tax law may also apply to limit our use of accumulated state tax attributes. In addition, at the state level, there may be periods during which the use of net operating losses is suspended or otherwise limited, which could accelerate or permanently increase state taxes owed. As a result, we may be unable to use all or a material portion of our net operating losses and other tax attributes, which could adversely affect our future cash flows.

As a core part of our strategy, we intend to enter into strategic transactions, including acquisitions of companies, asset purchases and in-licensing of intellectual property with the potential to acquire and advance new assets or product candidates where we believe we are well qualified to optimize the development of promising therapies. Our ability to realize the anticipated benefits of an acquisition will depend, to a large extent, on our ability to continue the development of assets, technologies and programs we acquire. The expected synergies in development programs, pipelines and other areas of focus may not be realized on a timely basis or at all, and there may be risks associated with the acquisition that we did not previously anticipate. For example, we may learn of unanticipated liabilities that we have assumed in any acquisition. Additional potential transactions that we may consider in the future include a variety of business arrangements, including strategic partnerships, in-licensing of product candidates, strategic collaborations, joint ventures, restructurings, divestitures, business combinations and investments. Any future transactions could increase our near and long-term expenditures, result in potentially dilutive issuances of our equity securities, including our common stock, or the incurrence of debt, contingent liabilities, amortization expenses or acquired in-process research and development expenses, any of which could affect our financial condition, liquidity and results of operations. Future acquisitions may also require us to obtain additional financing, which may not be available on favorable terms or at all. These transactions may never be successful and may require significant time and attention of our management. In addition, the integration of any business that we may acquire in the future may disrupt our existing business and may be a complex, risky and costly endeavor for which we may never realize the full benefits of the acquisition. Accordingly, although there can be no assurance that we will undertake or successfully complete any additional transactions of the nature described above, any additional transactions that we do complete could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We depend on sole source and limited source suppliers for certain drug substances, drug products, raw materials, samples, components, and other materials used in our product candidates. We do not currently have long-term supply contracts with all of our CMOs and they are not obligated to supply drug products to us for any period, in any specified quantity or at any certain price beyond the delivery contemplated by the relevant purchase orders. As a result, our suppliers could stop selling to us at commercially reasonable prices, or at all. While we have entered into long-term master supply agreements with certain of our CMOs, in the future as we advance our clinical trials or commercialization plans, we may not be successful in negotiating additional long-term supply agreements on favorable terms or at all. If we do enter into such long-term master supply agreements, or enter into such agreements on less favorable terms than we currently have with certain of our CMOs, we could be subject to binding long-term purchase obligations that may be harmful to our business, including in the event that we do not conduct our trials on planned timelines or utilize the drug products that we are required to purchase. For example, in July 2024, we and one of our CMOs entered into an agreement to terminate a supply agreement in connection with which we expect to incur contract termination costs of approximately $14.3 million. In any event, any change in our relationships with our CMOs or changes to contractual terms of our agreements with them could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Furthermore, any of the sole source and limited source suppliers upon whom we rely could stop producing our supplies, cease operations or be acquired by, or enter into exclusive arrangements with, our competitors. Additionally, our manufacturing process for izokibep and lonigutamab requires special equipment, and identifying additional suppliers able to fabricate such equipment at their facility at acceptable costs may be difficult. Establishing additional or replacement suppliers for these supplies, and obtaining regulatory clearance or approvals that may result from adding or replacing suppliers, could take a substantial amount of time, result in increased costs and impair our ability to produce our products, which would adversely impact our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Any such interruption or delay may force us to seek similar supplies from alternative sources, which may not be available at reasonable prices, or at all. Any interruption in the supply of sole source or limited source components for our product candidates would adversely affect our ability to meet scheduled timelines and budget for the development and commercialization of our product candidates, could result in higher expenses and would harm our business. For example, we were notified in 2024 that manufacturing facilities where our CMO manufactures lonigutamab drug substance will be closing. Accordingly, we are in the process of transferring lonigutamab drug substance manufacturing to the CMO's alternative manufacturing plant, which will require process changes, comparability studies, and regulatory filings to compliantly support clinical trials. Such tech transfer activities involves rigorous planning and execution with associated technical resources. We cannot assure you that we will not experience any disruptions in our lonigutamab drug substance supply as a result of the transfer. In this regard, although we have not experienced any significant disruption as a result of our reliance on limited or sole source suppliers to date, we have a limited operating history and cannot assure you that we will not experience disruptions in our supply chain in the future as a result of such reliance or otherwise.

As a public company we incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. The Securities Act, the Exchange Act, Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the listing requirements of the Nasdaq Global Select Market and other applicable securities rules and regulations impose various requirements on public companies, including establishment and maintenance of effective disclosure and financial controls and corporate governance practices. Our management and other personnel will continue to need to devote a substantial amount of time to these compliance initiatives. Moreover, we expect these rules and regulations to substantially increase our legal and financial compliance costs over those incurred as a private company and to make some activities more time consuming and costly, particularly after we are no longer an emerging growth company. We cannot predict or estimate the amount or timing of additional costs we may incur to respond to these requirements, and these increased costs may require us to reduce costs in other areas of our business. The impact of these requirements could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors, our board committees or as executive officers.

We plan to seek regulatory approval of our current or future product candidates outside of the U.S. In order to market any product outside of the U.S., however, we must establish and comply with the numerous and varying safety, efficacy and other regulatory requirements of other applicable countries. Approval procedures vary among countries and can involve additional product candidate testing and additional administrative review periods. The time required to obtain approvals in other countries might differ substantially from that required to obtain FDA approval. The marketing approval processes in other countries generally implicate all of the risks detailed above regarding FDA approval in the U.S. as well as other risks. In particular, in many countries outside of the U.S., products must receive pricing and reimbursement approval before the product can be commercialized. Obtaining this approval can result in substantial delays in bringing products to market in such countries. Marketing approval in one country does not ensure marketing approval in another, but a failure or delay in obtaining marketing approval in one country may have a negative effect on the regulatory process in others and would impair our ability to market our current or future product candidates in such foreign markets. Any such impairment would reduce the size of our potential market, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

In some countries, particularly in the European Union, the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject to governmental control. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after the receipt of marketing approval for a drug. To obtain coverage and reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of our product candidate to other available therapies. In addition, many countries outside the U.S. have limited government support programs that provide for reimbursement of drugs such as our product candidates, with an emphasis on private payors for access to commercial products. If reimbursement of our products, if approved is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, our business could be materially harmed.

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 or processing) personal data and other sensitive information, including proprietary and confidential business data, trade secrets, employee data, intellectual property, data we or our vendors collect about trial participants in connection with clinical trials, and other sensitive third-party data (collectively, sensitive data). Our data processing activities may subject us to numerous data privacy and security laws and regulations, guidance, industry standards, external and internal privacy and security policies, contractual requirements, and other obligations. Various legislative and regulatory bodies, or self-regulatory organizations, may enact new or expand or otherwise revise existing laws, rules or regulations, or guidance regarding data privacy and security. In the United States, federal, state, and local governments have enacted numerous data privacy and security laws, including data breach notification laws, personal data privacy laws, consumer protection laws (e.g., Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act), and other similar laws (e.g., wiretapping laws). For example, HIPAA, as amended by HITECH, imposes specific requirements relating to the privacy, security, and transmission of individually identifiable health information. Additionally, in the past few years, numerous U.S. states-including California, Virginia, Colorado, Connecticut, and Utah-have enacted comprehensive privacy laws that impose certain obligations on covered businesses, including providing specific disclosures in privacy notices and affording residents with certain rights concerning their personal data. As applicable, such rights may include the right to access, correct, or delete certain personal data, and to opt-out of certain data processing activities, such as targeted advertising, profiling, and automated decision-making. The exercise of these rights may impact our business and ability to provide our products and services. Certain states also impose stricter requirements for processing certain personal data, including sensitive information, such as conducting data privacy impact assessments. These state laws allow for statutory fines for noncompliance. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act, as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 ("CPRA") (collectively, "CCPA") applies to personal information of consumers, business representatives, and employees, and among other things requires businesses to provide specific disclosures in privacy notices and honor requests of California residents to exercise certain privacy rights, including the right to opt out of certain disclosures of their information. The CCPA provides for civil penalties of up to $7,500 per violation as well as a private right of action with statutory damages for certain data breaches, thereby potentially increasing risks associated with a data breach. Although the CCPA and other comprehensive state privacy laws include limited exceptions, including for certain information collected as part of clinical trials, these developments may impact our processing of personal information and increases the compliance costs and legal risk for us and the third parties upon whom we rely. Similar laws are being considered in several other states, as well as at the federal and local levels and we expect more states to pass similar laws in the future. In addition to government activity, privacy advocacy groups and technology and other industries are considering various new, additional or different self-regulatory standards that may place additional burdens on us. There are also various laws and regulations in other jurisdictions outside the United States relating to data privacy and security, with which we may need to comply. For example, the EU GDPR and the United Kingdom's equivalent ("UK GDPR"), collectively, GDPR, impose strict requirements for processing personal data. We also have clinical trial activities in Asia, and may be subject to new and emerging data privacy regimes such as Japan's Act on the Protection of Personal Information. Notably, the GDPR imposes large penalties for noncompliance, including the potential for fines of up to €20 million under the EU GDPR / £17.5 million under the UK GDPR, or 4% of the annual global revenue of the noncompliant entity, whichever is greater. The GDPR also provides for private litigation related to processing of personal data brought by classes of data subjects or consumer protection organizations authorized at law to represent their interests. Additionally, EU member states may introduce further conditions, including limitations, and make their own laws and regulations further limiting the processing of special categories of personal data, including personal data related to health, biometric data used for unique identification purposes and genetic information, which could limit our ability to collect, use and share EU data, and could cause our compliance costs to increase, ultimately adversely affecting our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In addition, we may be unable to transfer personal data from Europe and other jurisdictions to the United States or other countries due to data localization requirements or limitations on cross-border data flows. Europe and other jurisdictions have enacted laws requiring data to be localized or limiting the transfer of personal data to other countries. In particular, the European Economic Area ("EEA") and the UK have significantly restricted the transfer of personal data to the United States and other countries whose privacy laws it believes are inadequate. Other jurisdictions may adopt similarly stringent interpretations of their data localization and cross-border data transfer laws. Although there are currently various mechanisms that may be used to transfer personal data from the EEA and UK to the United States in compliance with law, such as the EEA standard contractual clauses, the UK's International Data Transfer Agreement / Addendum, and the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework and the UK extension thereto (which allows for transfers to relevant U.S.-based organizations who self-certify compliance and participate in the Framework), these mechanisms are subject to legal challenges, and there is no assurance that we can satisfy or rely on these measures to lawfully transfer personal data to the United States. If there is no lawful manner for us to transfer personal data from the EEA, the UK or other jurisdictions to the United States, or if the requirements for a legally-compliant transfer are too onerous, we could face significant adverse consequences, including the interruption or degradation of our operations, the need to relocate part of or all of our business or data processing activities to other jurisdictions at significant expense, increased exposure to regulatory actions, substantial fines and penalties, the inability to transfer data and work with partners, vendors and other third parties, and injunctions against our processing or transferring of personal data necessary to operate our business. Additionally, companies that transfer personal data out of the EEA and UK to other jurisdictions, particularly to the United States, are subject to increased scrutiny from regulators, individual litigants, and activist groups. Some European regulators have ordered certain companies to suspend or permanently cease certain transfers out of Europe for allegedly violating the EU GDPR's cross-border data transfer limitations. In addition to data privacy and security laws, we are also bound by other contractual obligations related to data privacy and security, and our efforts to comply with such obligations may not be successful. Each of these laws, rules, regulations and contractual obligations relating to data privacy and security, and any other such changes or new laws, rules, regulations or contractual obligations could impose significant limitations, require changes to our business, or restrict our collection, use, storage or processing of personal information, which may increase our compliance expenses and make our business more costly or less efficient to conduct. In addition, any such changes could compromise our ability to develop an adequate marketing strategy and pursue our growth strategy effectively or even prevent us from providing certain products in jurisdictions in which we currently operate and in which we may operate in the future or incur potential liability in an effort to comply with such legislation, which, in turn, could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Complying with these numerous, complex and often changing regulations is expensive and difficult, and failure to comply with any data privacy or security laws, whether by us, one of our CROs, CMOs or business associates or another third party, could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects, including but not limited to: investigation costs; material fines and penalties; compensatory, special, punitive and statutory damages; litigation; consent orders regarding our privacy and security practices; requirements that we provide notices, credit monitoring services and/or credit restoration services or other relevant services to impacted individuals; adverse actions against our licenses to do business; reputational damage; and injunctive relief. The CCPA and GDPR have increased our responsibility and liability in relation to personal data that we process, including in clinical trials, and we may in the future be required to put in place additional mechanisms to ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations, which could divert management's attention and increase our cost of doing business. In addition, new regulation or legislative actions regarding data privacy and security (together with applicable industry standards) may increase our costs of doing business. In this regard, we expect that there will continue to be new proposed laws, regulations and industry standards relating to privacy and data protection in the United States, the EEA and other jurisdictions, and we cannot determine the impact such future laws, regulations and standards may have on our business. Any actual or perceived failure by us or our third-party service providers to comply with any federal, state or foreign laws, rules, regulations, industry self-regulatory principles, industry standards or codes of conduct, regulatory guidance, orders to which we may be subject or other legal obligations relating to privacy, data protection, data security or consumer protection could adversely affect our reputation, brand and business and result in adverse consequences including but not limited to: government enforcement actions (e.g., investigations, fines, penalties, audits, inspections, and similar); litigation (including class-action claims) and mass arbitration demands; additional reporting requirements and/or oversight; bans on processing personal data; orders to destroy or not use personal data; and imprisonment of company officials. In particular, plaintiffs have become increasingly more active in bringing privacy-related claims against companies, including class claims and mass arbitration demands. Some of these claims allow for the recovery of statutory damages on a per violation basis, and, if viable, carry the potential for monumental statutory damages, depending on the volume of data and the number of violations. Any of these events could adversely affect our reputation, business, or financial condition, including but not limited to: loss of customers; interruptions or stoppages in our business operations (including clinical trials); inability to process personal data or to operate in certain jurisdictions; limited ability to develop or commercialize our products; expenditure of time and resources to defend any claim or inquiry; adverse publicity; or substantial changes to our business model or operations. We also publicly post policies concerning our collection, use, disclosure and other processing of the personal information provided to us by our website visitors and certain other parties. Although we endeavor to comply with our public statements and documentation, we may at times fail to do so or be perceived to have failed to do so. Our publication of our policies and other statements we publish that provide promises and assurances about privacy and security can subject us to potential state and federal action if they are found to be deceptive, unfair or misrepresentative of our actual practices. Any actual or perceived failure by us to comply with federal, state or foreign laws, rules or regulations, industry standards, contractual or other legal obligations, or any actual, perceived or suspected cybersecurity incident, whether or not resulting in unauthorized access to, or acquisition, release or transfer of personal information or other data, may result in enforcement actions and prosecutions, private litigation, significant fines, penalties and censure, claims for damages by customers and other affected individuals, regulatory inquiries and investigations or adverse publicity and could cause individuals and entities to lose trust in us, any of which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Any regulatory approvals that we or our existing or future collaborators obtain for our product candidates may also be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which a product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate. In addition, if the FDA, EMA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority approves any of our product candidates, the manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, post-approval monitoring and adverse event reporting, storage, import, export, advertising, promotion and recordkeeping for the product will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. The FDA has significant post-market authority, including the authority to require labeling changes based on new safety information and to require post-market studies or clinical trials to evaluate safety risks related to the use of a product or to require withdrawal of the product from the market. The FDA also has the authority to require a REMS plan after approval, which may impose further requirements or restrictions on the distribution or use of an approved drug. The manufacturing facilities we use to make a future product, if any, will also be subject to periodic review and inspection by the FDA and other regulatory agencies, including for continued compliance with current Good Manufacturing Practices ("cGMPs") requirements. The discovery of any new or previously unknown problems with our third-party manufacturers, manufacturing processes or facilities may result in restrictions on the product, manufacturer or facility, including withdrawal of the product from the market. As we expect to rely on third-party manufacturers, we will not have control over compliance with applicable rules and regulations by such manufacturers. Any product promotion and advertising will also be subject to regulatory requirements and continuing regulatory review. The FDA imposes stringent restrictions on manufacturers' communications regarding use of their products. Although clinicians may prescribe products for off-label uses as the FDA and other regulatory agencies do not regulate a physician's choice of drug treatment made in the physician's independent medical judgment, they do restrict promotional communications from companies or their sales force with respect to off-label uses of products. In addition, as we do not intend to conduct head-to-head comparative clinical trials for our product candidates, we will be unable to make comparative claims regarding any other products in the promotional materials for our product candidates. If we promote our products, if approved, in a manner inconsistent with FDA-approved labeling or otherwise not in compliance with FDA regulations, we may be subject to enforcement action. If we or our existing or future collaborators, manufacturers or service providers fail to comply with applicable continuing regulatory requirements in the United States or foreign jurisdictions in which we seek to market our product candidates, we or they may be subject to, among other things, fines, warning or untitled letters, holds on clinical trials, delay of approval or refusal by the FDA or similar foreign regulatory bodies to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications, suspension or withdrawal of regulatory approval, product recalls and seizures, administrative detention of products, refusal to permit the import or export of products, operating restrictions, injunction, civil penalties and criminal prosecution. Subsequent discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with our third-party manufacturers or manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in, among other things: - restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of the product, withdrawal of the product from the market or voluntary or mandatory product recalls;- fines, warning or untitled letters or holds on clinical trials;- refusal by the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency or the FDA to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications filed by us or our strategic partners;- suspension or revocation of product license approvals;- product seizure or detention or refusal to permit the import or export of products; and - injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties. We also cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative or executive action, either in the United States or abroad. Changes in FDA staffing could result in delays in the FDA's responsiveness or in its ability to review submissions or applications, issue regulations or guidance, or implement or enforce regulatory requirements in a timely fashion or at all.

In the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system, including cost-containment measures that may reduce or limit coverage and reimbursement for newly approved drugs and affect our ability to profitably sell any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. In particular, there have been and continue to be a number of initiatives at the U.S. federal and state levels that seek to reduce healthcare costs and improve the quality of healthcare. For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act (collectively, the "ACA") was enacted in the United States, which substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers in the United States and significantly affected the pharmaceutical industry. The ACA, among other things, subjected biologic products to potential competition by lower-cost biosimilars, addressed a new methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program ("MDRP") are calculated for drugs and biologics that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted or injected, increased the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by manufacturers under the MDRP, extended manufacturer Medicaid rebate obligations to utilization by individuals enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations, established annual fees and taxes on manufacturers of certain branded prescription drugs and biologics, and established a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program. Since its enactment, there have been judicial, congressional, and executive branch challenges to the ACA, which have resulted in delays in the implementation of, and action taken to repeal or replace, certain aspects of the ACA. On June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a challenge on procedural grounds that argued the ACA is unconstitutional in its entirety because the "individual mandate" was repealed by Congress. In addition, there have been a number of health reform initiatives by the Biden administration that have impacted the ACA. For example, on August 16, 2022, President Biden signed the IRA, into law, which among other things, extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in ACA 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 through a newly established manufacturer discount program. It is possible that the ACA will be subject to judicial or congressional challenges in the future. It is unclear how other such challenges, and the healthcare reform measures of the Biden administration will impact the ACA and our business. In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. For example, on August 2, 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011 was signed into law, which, among other things, resulted in reductions to Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect on April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect through 2032, with the exception of a temporary suspension from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021, unless additional Congressional action is taken. Further, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny in the United States of pharmaceutical pricing practices in light of the rising cost of prescription drugs. 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, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for products. For example, in July 2021, the Biden administration released an executive order, "Promoting Competition in the American Economy," with multiple provisions aimed at prescription drugs. In response to Biden's executive order, on September 9, 2021, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS") released a Comprehensive Plan for Addressing High Drug Prices that outlines principles for drug pricing reform and sets out a variety of potential legislative policies that Congress could pursue as well as potential administrative actions HHS can take to advance these principles. In addition, the IRA, among other things, (1) directs HHS to negotiate the price of certain single-source drugs and biologics covered under Medicare and (2) imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation. These provisions take effect progressively starting in fiscal year 2023, although the Medicare drug price negotiation program is currently subject to legal challenges. It is currently unclear how the IRA will be implemented but is likely to have a significant impact on the pharmaceutical industry. HHS released a report in February 2023 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, in December 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. The National Institute of Standards and Technology thereafter 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. Moreover, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2021, effective January 1, 2024, eliminates the statutory cap on rebate amounts owed by drug manufacturers under the MDRP, which was previously capped at 100% of the Average Manufacturer Price ("AMP") for a covered outpatient drug. At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented 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. Legally mandated price controls on payment amounts by third-party payors or other restrictions could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs. This could reduce the ultimate demand for our product candidates, if approved, or put pressure on our product pricing, which could negatively affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. We expect that the ACA, the IRA, and any other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, more rigorous coverage criteria, new payment methodologies and additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our product candidates, if approved.

As we conduct clinical trials of our current or future product candidates, we are exposed to significant product liability risks inherent in the development, testing, manufacturing and marketing of new treatments. Product liability claims could delay or prevent completion of our development programs. If we succeed in marketing products, such claims could result in FDA, EMA or other investigation of the safety and effectiveness of our future product candidates, our manufacturing processes and facilities or our marketing programs and potentially a recall of our products or more serious enforcement action, limitations on the approved indications for which they may be used or suspension or withdrawal of approvals. Regardless of the merits or eventual outcome, liability claims may also result in decreased demand for our product candidates, termination of clinical trial sites or entire trial programs, withdrawal of clinical trial participants, injury to our reputation and significant negative media attention, significant costs to defend the related litigation, a diversion of management's time and our resources from our business operations, substantial monetary awards to trial participants or patients, loss of revenue, the inability to commercialize any products that we may develop, and a decline in our stock price. We may need to obtain higher levels of product liability insurance for later stages of clinical development or marketing any of our product candidates. Any insurance we may obtain may not provide sufficient coverage against potential liabilities. Furthermore, clinical trial and product liability insurance is becoming increasingly expensive. As a result, we may be unable to obtain sufficient insurance at a reasonable cost to protect us against losses caused by product liability claims that could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We are currently party to license and collaboration agreements with Affibody, Pierre Fabre and Novelty Nobility, and we expect to enter into similar strategic transactions in the future. We may have conflicts with our current or future collaborators, such as conflicts concerning the interpretation of preclinical or clinical data, the achievement of milestones, the interpretation of contractual obligations, payments for services, development obligations or the ownership of intellectual property developed during our collaboration. If any conflicts arise with any of our collaborators, such collaborator may act in a manner that is adverse to our best interests. Any such disagreement could result in one or more of the following, each of which could delay or prevent the development or commercialization of our product candidates, and in turn prevent us from generating revenue: disputes regarding milestone payments or royalties; uncertainty regarding ownership of intellectual property rights arising from our collaborative activities, which could prevent us from entering into additional collaborations; unwillingness by the collaborator to cooperate in the development or manufacture of a product candidate, including providing us with data or materials; unwillingness on the part of a collaborator to keep us informed regarding the progress of its development and commercialization activities or to permit public disclosure of the results of those activities; initiating of litigation or alternative dispute resolution options by either party to resolve the dispute; or attempts by either party to terminate the agreement.

We rely and intend to rely in the future on third-party clinical investigators, CROs, clinical data management organizations to conduct, supervise and monitor preclinical studies and clinical trials of our current or future product candidates. Because we currently rely and intend to continue to rely on these third parties, we will have less control over the timing, quality and other aspects of preclinical studies and clinical trials than we would have had we conducted them independently. These parties are not, and will not be, our employees and we will have limited control over the amount of time and resources that they dedicate to our programs. Additionally, such parties may have contractual relationships with other entities, some of which may be our competitors, which may draw time and resources from our programs. We have no experience as a company in filing and supporting the applications necessary to gain marketing approvals. Securing marketing approval requires the submission of extensive preclinical and clinical data and supporting information to regulatory authorities for each indication to establish the product candidate's safety or efficacy for that indication. Securing marketing approval also requires the submission of information about the product manufacturing process to, and inspection of manufacturing facilities and clinical trial sites by, applicable regulatory authorities. Large-scale clinical trials require significant financial and management resources, and reliance on third-party clinical investigators, CROs, partners or consultants. Relying on third-party clinical investigators or CROs may force us to encounter delays and challenges that are outside of our control. For example, in November 2023 we reported a third party programming error impacted dose sequencing in our Phase 2b/3 trial of izokibep in PsA. In addition, we may not be able to demonstrate sufficient comparability between products manufactured at different facilities to allow for inclusion of the clinical results from participants treated with products from these different facilities, in our product registrations. Further, our third party clinical manufacturers may not be able to manufacture our product candidates or otherwise fulfill their obligations to us because of interruptions to their business, including the loss of their key staff or interruptions to their raw material supply. Our reliance on these third parties for development activities will reduce our control over these activities. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable trial protocol and legal, regulatory and scientific standards, and our reliance on the CROs, clinical trial sites, and other third parties does not relieve us of these responsibilities. For example, we will remain responsible for ensuring that each of our preclinical studies are conducted in accordance with good laboratory practices (GLPs) and clinical trials are conducted in accordance with GCPs. Moreover, the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities require us to comply with GCP for conducting, recording and reporting the results of clinical trials to assure that data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of trial participants are protected. Regulatory authorities enforce these requirements through periodic inspections (including pre-approval inspections once a BLA is submitted to the FDA) of trial sponsors, clinical investigators, trial sites and certain third parties including CROs. If we, our CROs, clinical trial sites, or other third parties fail to comply with applicable GCP or other regulatory requirements, we or they may be subject to enforcement or other legal actions, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials. We cannot assure you that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our clinical trials comply with GCP regulations. Moreover, our business may be significantly impacted if our CROs, clinical investigators or other third parties violate federal or state healthcare fraud and abuse or false claims laws and regulations or healthcare privacy and security laws. In the event we need to repeat, extend, delay or terminate our clinical trials because these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines or conduct our clinical trials in accordance with regulatory requirements or our stated protocols, our clinical trials may need to be repeated, extended, delayed or terminated and we may not be able to obtain, or may be delayed in obtaining, marketing approvals for our product candidates, and we will not be able to, or may be delayed in our efforts to, successfully commercialize our product candidates or we or they may be subject to regulatory enforcement actions. As a result, our results of operations and the commercial prospects for our product candidates would be harmed, our costs could increase and our ability to generate revenue could be delayed. For example, we experienced a third party programming error impacting dose sequencing in the Phase 2b/3 trial in PsA. To the extent we are unable to successfully identify and manage the performance of third-party service providers in the future, our business may be materially and adversely affected. Terminating existing agreements with these third parties to align with our changed strategies or reprioritization of product candidates could also result in expensive termination fees or expenses in negotiating. For example, prioritizing lonigutamab as our lead product candidate and suspending further development of izokibep required making amendments to our agreement with our third-party manufacturer, which resulted in additional expense to and termination fees of approximately $7.2 million in the quarter ended September 30, 2024. If any of our relationships with these third parties terminate, we may not be able to enter into alternative arrangements or do so on commercially reasonable terms. Switching or adding additional contractors involves additional cost and time and requires management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new third party commences work. As a result, delays could occur, which could compromise our ability to meet our desired development timelines. In addition, if an agreement with any of our collaborators terminates, our access to technology and intellectual property licensed to us by that collaborator may be restricted or terminate entirely, which may delay our continued development of our product candidates utilizing the collaborator's technology or intellectual property or require us to stop development of those product candidates completely. In addition, principal investigators for our clinical trials may serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us from time to time and receive compensation in connection with such services. Under certain circumstances, we may be required to report some of these relationships to the FDA. The FDA may conclude that a financial relationship between us and/or a principal investigator has created a conflict of interest or otherwise affected interpretation of the study. The FDA may therefore question the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site and the utility of the clinical trial itself may be jeopardized. This could result in a delay in approval, or rejection, of our marketing applications by the FDA and may ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of one or more of our product candidates.