Galecto (NASDAQ: GLTO) resale filing covers 60.5M PIPE and Damora shares

Galecto (NASDAQ: GLTO) resale filing covers 60.5M PIPE and Damora shares

Rhea-AI Filing Summary

FAQ

Rhea-AI Filing Summary

Q: What is Galecto (GLTO) registering in this resale prospectus?

Q: Does Galecto (GLTO) receive any proceeds from the sale of the registered shares?

Q: What approvals are required before Galecto (GLTO) preferred stock can convert into common stock?

Q: When does Galecto (GLTO) expect to begin clinical trials for DMR-001 and GB3226?

What is Galecto (GLTO) registering in this resale prospectus?

Does Galecto (GLTO) receive any proceeds from the sale of the registered shares?

How are the Galecto (GLTO) Resale Shares related to the Damora asset acquisition and PIPE financing?

What approvals are required before Galecto (GLTO) preferred stock can convert into common stock?

What is Galecto (GLTO) focusing on after the Damora asset acquisition?

When does Galecto (GLTO) expect to begin clinical trials for DMR-001 and GB3226?

Positive

Negative

Trending News

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Galecto is registering 60,513,309 shares of common stock for resale by selling stockholders. These include 265,309 Merger Common Shares , 16,366,000 Merger Conversion Series B Shares , 4,241,000 Merger Conversion Series C Shares , and 39,641,000 Private Placement Conversion Shares issuable upon conversion of Series B and Series C preferred stock.

No. Galecto states that it is not offering or selling any Resale Shares under this prospectus and will not receive any proceeds from the sale or other disposition of Resale Shares by the selling stockholders.

Conversion of Galecto’s Series B and Series C Preferred Stock into common stock is subject to Conversion Approval by stockholders under Nasdaq rules and to beneficial ownership limitations set by each holder. Each Series B share may convert into 1,000 common shares at the holder’s option, and each Series C share will automatically convert into 1,000 common shares after such approval and within ownership caps.

Galecto intends to file an IND for DMR-001 in mid‑ 2026 and then start a Phase 1 trial in ET and MF patients using a subcutaneous formulation, subject to regulatory approval. It also plans to file an IND for GB3226 in AML patients in the first quarter of 2026 for an open‑label, dose‑escalation and expansion Phase 1 study.

Filing Impact

(Low)

Filing Sentiment

(Neutral)

Form Type

S-3

Galecto, Inc. is registering 60,513,309 shares of common stock for resale by existing stockholders, all tied to prior Damora and PIPE financing transactions. The Resale Shares comprise 265,309 merger common shares, 16,366,000 shares issuable from Series B preferred, 4,241,000 shares issuable from merger Series C preferred, and 39,641,000 shares issuable from PIPE Series C preferred, each preferred share converting into 1,000 common shares subject to stockholder Conversion Approval and holder-specific ownership limits. Galecto will not sell any shares or receive proceeds from these resales. The company is refocused on hematologic cancers, led by mutCALR-targeting antibodies DMR-001/002/003 and dual ENL‑YEATS/FLT3 inhibitor GB3226, with IND filings for DMR-001 and GB3226 planned in 2026.

12/16/2025 - 04:53 PM

As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on December 16, 2025

Registration No. 333-

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM S-3

REGISTRATION STATEMENT

UNDER

THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933

Galecto, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Delaware

37-1957007

(State or other jurisdiction of

incorporation or organization)

(I.R.S. Employer

Identification No.)

Ole Maaloes Vej 3

DK-2200 Copenhagen N

Denmark

75 State Street

Suite 100

Boston, MA 02109

(+45) 70 70 52 10

(Address, including zip code, and telephone number, including area code, of registrant’s principal executive offices)

The Corporation Trust Company

c/o Galecto, Inc.

1209 Orange Street

Wilmington, DE 19801

(Name, address, including zip code, and telephone number, including area code, of agent for service)

Copies to:

Ryan A. Murr

Branden C. Berns

Melanie E. Neary

Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP

One Embarcadero Center, Suite 2600

San Francisco, CA 94111

(415) 393-8373

Approximate date of commencement of proposed sale to the public: From time to time after the effective date of this Registration Statement.

If the only securities being registered on this Form are being offered pursuant to dividend or interest reinvestment plans, please check the following box: ☐

If any of the securities being registered on this Form are to be offered on a delayed or continuous basis pursuant to Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, other than securities offered only in connection with dividend or interest reinvestment plans, check the following box: ☒

If this Form is filed to register additional securities for an offering pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act, please check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earlier effective registration statement for the same offering: ☐

If this Form is a post-effective amendment filed pursuant to Rule 462(c) under the Securities Act, check the following box and list the Securities Act registration statement number of the earliest effective registration statement for the same offering: ☐

If this Form is a registration statement pursuant to General Instruction I.D. or a post-effective amendment thereto that shall become effective upon filing with the Commission pursuant to Rule 462(e) under the Securities Act, check the following box: ☐

If this Form is a post-effective amendment to a registration statement filed pursuant to General Instruction I. D. filed to register additional securities or additional classes of securities pursuant to Rule 413(b) under the Securities Act, check the following box: ☐

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

If an emerging growth company, 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 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act. ☐

The Registrant hereby amends this registration statement on such date or dates as may be necessary to delay its effective date until the Registrant shall file a further amendment that specifically states that this registration statement shall thereafter become effective in accordance with Section 8(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or until this registration statement shall become effective on such date as the Commission, acting pursuant to said Section 8(a), may determine.

The information in this prospectus is not complete and may be changed. The selling stockholders named in this prospectus may not sell these securities until the registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) is effective. This prospectus is not an offer to sell these securities, and it is not soliciting an offer to buy these securities, in any jurisdiction where the offer or sale is not permitted.

SUBJECT TO COMPLETION, DATED DECEMBER 16, 2025

PROSPECTUS

LOGO

Galecto, Inc.

60,513,309 Shares

Common Stock

Offered by the Selling Stockholders

This prospectus relates to the proposed resale or other disposition by the selling stockholders identified herein (the “Selling Stockholders”), of up to (i) 265,309 shares (“Merger Common Shares”) of our common stock, par value $0.00001 per share (“Common Stock”), (ii) 16,366,000 shares of Common Stock (“Merger Conversion Series B Shares”) issuable upon the conversion of 16,366 shares (“Merger Series B Preferred Shares”) of our Series B Preferred Stock, par value $0.00001 per share (“Series B Preferred Stock”), (iii) 4,241,000 shares of Common Stock (“Merger Conversion Series C Shares” and, together with the Merger Conversion Series B Shares, the “Merger Conversion Shares”) issuable upon the conversion of 4,241 shares (“Merger Series C Preferred Shares” and together with the Merger Series B Preferred Shares, the “Merger Preferred Shares”) of our Series C Preferred Stock, par value $0.00001 per share (“Series C Preferred Stock”), and (iv) 39,641,000 shares of Common Stock (the “Private Placement Conversion Shares”) issuable upon the conversion of 39,641 shares of our Series C Preferred Stock (the “Private Placement Preferred Shares”). Subject to receiving approval by our stockholders of the issuance of shares of Common Stock upon conversion of Series B Preferred Stock and Series C Preferred Stock in accordance with Nasdaq rules (the “Conversion Approval”) and certain beneficial ownership limitations set by each preferred stockholder, each share of Series B Preferred Stock may, at the option of the holder, convert into 1,000 shares of Common Stock, and each share of Series C Preferred Stock will automatically convert into 1,000 shares of Common Stock. The shares of Common Stock registered by this prospectus are referred to herein as the “Resale Shares.”

The Merger Common Shares and Merger Preferred Shares were issued and sold to former stockholders of Damora Therapeutics, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Damora”), in connection with our acquisition (the “Asset Acquisition”) of Damora, which closed on November 10, 2025. The Private Placement Preferred Shares were issued and sold to accredited investors in a private placement (the “PIPE” and, together with the Asset Acquisition, the “Transactions”), which closed on November 12, 2025. We are not offering or selling any Resale Shares under this prospectus and will not receive any of the proceeds from the sale or other disposition of Resale Shares by the Selling Stockholders.

The Selling Stockholders may sell the Resale Shares on any national securities exchange or quotation service on which the securities may be listed or quoted at the time of sale, on the over-the-counter market, in one or more transactions otherwise than on these exchanges or systems, such as privately negotiated transactions, or using a combination of these methods, and at fixed prices, at prevailing market prices at the time of the sale, at varying prices determined at the time of sale, or at negotiated prices. See the disclosure under the heading “Plan of Distribution” elsewhere in this prospectus for more information about how the Selling Stockholders may sell or otherwise dispose of their Resale Shares hereunder.

The Selling Stockholders may sell any, all or none of the securities offered by this prospectus and we do not know when or in what amount the Selling Stockholders may sell their Resale Shares hereunder following the effective date of the registration statement of which this prospectus forms a part.

You should carefully read this prospectus and any applicable prospectus supplement, as well as any documents incorporated by reference herein or therein, before you invest in any of the securities being offered.

Our Common Stock is traded on the Nasdaq Capital Market under the symbol “GLTO.” On December 15, 2025, the last reported sales price for our Common Stock was $31.60 per share.

An investment in our securities involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the information under the heading “Risk Factors” beginning on page 51 of this prospectus and any applicable prospectus supplement, and under similar headings in the other documents that are incorporated by reference into this prospectus.

Neither the SEC nor any state securities commission has approved or disapproved of these securities or determined if this prospectus is truthful or complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense. The securities are not being offered in any jurisdiction where the offer is not permitted.

The date of this prospectus is , 2026

TABLE OF CONTENTS


	PAGE
ABOUT THIS PROSPECTUS		1
CAUTIONARY STATEMENT CONCERNING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS		2
PROSPECTUS SUMMARY		3
RISK FACTORS		51
INCORPORATION OF INFORMATION BY REFERENCE		95
USE OF PROCEEDS		96
SELLING STOCKHOLDERS		97
PLAN OF DISTRIBUTION		107
DESCRIPTION OF CAPITAL STOCK		109
LEGAL MATTERS		115
EXPERTS		116
WHERE YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION		117

ABOUT THIS PROSPECTUS

This prospectus is part of a registration statement on Form S-3 that we filed with the SEC using a “shelf” registration process. Under this shelf registration process, the Selling Stockholders may, from time to time, offer and sell the securities described in this prospectus in one or more offerings. Information about the Selling Stockholders may change over time.

This prospectus provides you with a general description of the securities the Selling Stockholders may offer. Each time the Selling Stockholders sell shares of Common Stock using this prospectus, to the extent necessary and required by law, we will provide a prospectus supplement that will contain specific information about the terms of that offering, including the number of shares of Common Stock being offered, the manner of distribution, the identity of any underwriters or other counterparties and other specific terms related to the offering. The prospectus supplement may also add, update or change information contained in this prospectus. To the extent that any statement made in a prospectus supplement is inconsistent with statements made in this prospectus, the statements made in this prospectus will be deemed modified or superseded by those made in the prospectus supplement. You should read this prospectus, any applicable prospectus supplement and the information incorporated by reference in this prospectus before making an investment in shares of our Common Stock. See “Where You Can Find More Information” for more information.

This prospectus contains and incorporates by reference information that you should consider when making your investment decision. Neither we nor the Selling Stockholders have authorized anyone to give any information or to make any representation other than those contained or incorporated by reference in this prospectus. The Selling Stockholders are offering to sell, and seeking offers to buy, our securities only in jurisdictions where it is lawful to do so. We have not authorized anyone to provide you with different information. This prospectus and any accompanying prospectus supplement do not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any securities other than the securities described in any accompanying prospectus supplement or an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy such securities in any circumstances in which such offer or solicitation is unlawful. You should assume that the information appearing in this prospectus, any prospectus supplement, the documents incorporated by reference herein and any related free writing prospectus is accurate only as of their respective dates. Our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may have changed materially since those dates.

In this prospectus, unless the context otherwise requires, the terms “Galecto,” the “Company,” “we,” “us,” and “our” refer to Galecto, Inc., a Delaware corporation, and, where appropriate, its consolidated subsidiaries.

This prospectus contains trade names, trademarks and service marks of others, which are the property of their respective owners. Solely for convenience, trademarks and trade names referred to in this prospectus may appear without the ^® or TM symbols.

All references to “our product candidates,” “our programs” and “our pipeline” in this prospectus include the research programs with respect to which we have the option to acquire intellectual property license rights to pursuant to that certain antibody discovery and option agreement by and among Damora, Paragon Therapeutics, Inc. (“Paragon”) and Paramora Holding LLC (“Paramora”), dated October 7, 2025 (the “Paragon Option Agreement”), which we assumed pursuant to the Asset Acquisition. As of the date of this prospectus, we have exercised the option for DMR-001. We have not exercised the option for DMR-002 or DMR-003 or entered into a license agreement for DMR-001, DMR-002 or DMR-003. We expect to finalize the DMR-001 license agreement in the first quarter of 2026.

For investors outside of the United States, neither we nor the Selling Stockholders have done anything that would permit the offering or possession or distribution of this prospectus in any jurisdiction where action for that purpose is required, other than in the United States. You are required to inform yourselves about and to observe any restrictions relating to the offering and the distribution of this prospectus outside of the United States.

CAUTIONARY STATEMENT CONCERNING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This prospectus, including the documents that we incorporate by reference, contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). These forward-looking statements involve a number of risks and uncertainties. We caution readers that any forward-looking statement is not a guarantee of future performance and that actual results could differ materially from those contained in the forward-looking statement. These statements are based on current expectations of future events.

All statements, other than statements of historical facts contained in this prospectus, including, without limitation, statements regarding: the Conversion Approval; our ability to achieve the expected benefits or opportunities and related timing with respect to the Asset Acquisition of Damora, our future results of operations and financial position, business strategy, the length of time that we believe our existing cash resources will fund our operations, our market size, our potential growth opportunities, our preclinical and future clinical development activities, the efficacy and safety profile of our product candidates, the potential therapeutic benefits and economic value of our product candidates, the timing and results of preclinical studies and clinical trials, the expected impact of adverse macroeconomic conditions, including inflation, slower growth or recession, new or increased tariffs and other barriers to trade, changes to fiscal and monetary policy or government budget dynamics (particularly in the pharmaceutical and biotech areas), volatility in financial markets and other challenges in the global economy, and the receipt and timing of potential regulatory designations, approvals and commercialization of product candidates. Forward-looking statements generally relate to future events or our future financial or operating performance. Forward-looking statements generally relate to future events or our future financial or operating performance. The words “believe,” “may,” “will,” “potentially,” “estimate,” “continue,” “anticipate,” “predict,” “target,” “intend,” “could,” “would,” “should,” “project,” “plan,” “expect,” and similar expressions that convey uncertainty of future events or outcomes are intended to identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain these identifying words.

These forward-looking statements are subject to a number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions. Moreover, we operate in a very competitive and rapidly changing environment, and new risks emerge from time to time. It is not possible for our management to predict all risks, nor can we assess the impact of all factors on our business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements we may make. Factors that might cause such a difference include those discussed in our most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K, as supplemented and updated by subsequent Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and Current Reports on Form 8-K that we have filed or will file with the SEC, and in other documents which are incorporated by reference into this prospectus, as well as the risk factors and other information contained in or incorporated by reference into any accompanying prospectus supplement. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this prospectus or, in the case of documents referred to or incorporated by reference, the date of those documents.

In addition, statements that “we believe” and similar statements reflect our beliefs and opinions on the relevant subject. These statements are based on information available to us as of the date of this prospectus. While we believe that such information provides a reasonable basis for these statements, such information may be limited or incomplete. Our statements should not be read to indicate that we have conducted an exhaustive inquiry into, or review of, all relevant information. These statements are inherently uncertain, and investors are cautioned not to unduly rely on these statements.

All subsequent written or oral forward-looking statements attributable to us or any person acting on our behalf are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements contained or referred to in this section. We do not undertake any obligation to release publicly any revisions to these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this prospectus or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events, except as may be required under applicable U.S. securities laws. If we do update one or more forward-looking statements, no inference should be drawn that we will make additional updates with respect to those or other forward-looking statements.

PROSPECTUS SUMMARY

This summary may not contain all the information that you should consider before investing in securities. You should read the entire prospectus and the information incorporated by reference in this prospectus carefully, including “Risk Factors” and the financial data and related notes and other information incorporated by reference herein, before making an investment decision.

All references to “our product candidates,” “our programs” and “our pipeline” in this prospectus include the research programs with respect to which we have the option to acquire intellectual property license rights to pursuant to that certain antibody discovery and option agreement by and among Damora, Paragon and Paramora, dated October 7, 2025 (the “Paragon Option Agreement”), which we assumed pursuant to the Asset Acquisition. As of the date of this prospectus, we have exercised the option for DMR-001. We have not exercised the option for DMR-002 or DMR-003 or entered into a license agreement for DMR-001, DMR-002, or DMR-003. We expect to finalize the DMR-001 license agreement in the first quarter of 2026.

Company Overview

We are a biopharmaceutical company developing therapies for the treatment of hematological malignancies. In our recently announced Asset Acquisition, we bolstered our pipeline with the addition of three product candidates designed to treat myeloproliferative neoplasms (“MPNs”), a group of related, chronic cancers of the bone marrow. Our lead product candidate, DMR-001, targets mutant forms of the calcium binding protein calreticulin (“CALR”) which are collectively known as mutCALR. We have the option to license exclusive worldwide development and commercialization rights to DMR-001 from Paragon pursuant to the Paragon Option Agreement. We intend to develop DMR-001 for the treatment of essential thrombocythemia (“ET”), an MPN associated with the overproduction of platelets, and myelofibrosis (“MF”), an MPN involving the overproliferation of blood cells in the bone marrow. In contrast to marketed therapies for ET, DMR-001 is designed to selectively target cells that express mutCALR while avoiding the adverse effects associated with non-specific cytoreductive drugs. We believe that the potential combination of increased clinical activity and improved pharmacokinetics of DMR-001 positions it as a potential best-in-class therapy for ET, MF and other mutCALR-related diseases. In addition to two other mutCALR-targeting product candidates, DMR-002 and DMR-003, for which we also have the option to license exclusive worldwide development and commercialization rights from Paragon pursuant to the Paragon Option Agreement, our portfolio includes GB3226, a small molecule inhibitor of ENL-YEATS and FLT3 for the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (“AML”). Based on our preclinical results, we believe that GB3226 has the potential to treat a broad portion of the AML patient population, including those patients who have high-risk genetic mutations. We intend to initiate clinical development of DMR-001, DMR-002 and GB3226 in 2026, and DMR-003 in 2027. Pursuant to the Paragon Option Agreement, we have engaged Paragon to execute a mutually agreed research plan for DMR-001, DMR-002, and DMR-003 aimed at producing potential product candidates to be licensed for further development, manufacture and commercialization by us. The research plan activities performed by Paragon for us primarily include preclinical studies and are overseen by a joint development committee comprised of our employees and employees of Paragon.

MPNs are caused by excessive proliferation of myeloid cells. In some patients, including ET patients, MPNs are considered chronic diseases that lead to significant decreases in quality of life, but are not associated with increased mortality. MPNs also include MF, which is associated with poor prognosis and increased mortality. One feature that makes MPNs attractive indications for drug development is that mutations in just a small number of genes are responsible for a significant percentage of cases, which enables the opportunity to develop targeted therapies. Our ultimate goal is to develop a portfolio of targeted mutation-directed candidates to address the full spectrum of MPN disease.

DMR-001 is a monoclonal antibody that targets mutations in CALR, including the two major forms referred to as Type 1 and Type 2 mutCALR. CALR mutations are the drivers of about a quarter of all cases of ET, a disease with a prevalence in the United States of about 140,000 patients. ET is characterized by excessive production of platelets, leading to symptoms that range from tingling or burning in the hands and feet to headache, visual problems, weakness, dizziness and vascular problems such as heart attacks and stroke. Approximately 17% of ET patients progress to MF, a disease with a prevalence in the United States of about 20,000 patients. CALR mutations are also the driver of about 35% of all cases of MF. MF is characterized by scarring of the bone marrow, which interferes with the body’s ability to produce healthy blood cells.

The primary goal in the treatment of ET is to lower platelet counts. Current treatments, including drugs such as hydroxyurea and anagrelide, are not designed to be selective for platelets affected by mutCALR. DMR-001 is designed to specifically block proliferation of platelets containing mutCALR, without impairing normal platelets and other types of blood cells. Third-party Phase 1 data from INCA033989, an antibody therapy in development by Incyte Corporation (“Incyte”), demonstrated clinical proof-of-concept for the potential of targeting mutCALR with an antibody therapy. In this Phase 1 trial, INCA033989 treatment led to a rapid and sustained reduction of mutCALR platelets and no reported cases of thrombocytopenia.

We believe that DMR-001 has the potential to become a best-in-class anti-mutCALR therapy due to two differentiating features compared to marketed therapies and therapies in development, including INCA033989. First, our preclinical studies demonstrated that DMR-001 is a more potent inhibitor of mutCALR-dependent cell proliferation compared to a reference mutCALR targeted monoclonal antibody. This is especially relevant with regard to patients with Type 2 mutCALR, which represent about a third of mutCALR patients. Whereas Type 1 mutations are characterized by a deletion of 52 base pairs in the gene for CALR, Type 2 mutations have an insertion of 5 base pairs. Our preclinical assays demonstrated that DMR-001 has approximately ten-fold higher potency on Type 2 mutCALR than a reference mutCALR antibody with the same mechanism of action as INCA033989. Second, DMR-001 was engineered to have an increased half-life in circulation through the incorporation of sequence modifications that have previously been shown to improve pharmacokinetics in humans. Our preclinical data generated in non-human primates (“NHPs”), confirmed the improved half-life of DMR-001 compared to a reference antibody.

The expected combination of increased clinical activity and longer half-life is predicted to enable the delivery of sufficient amounts of DMR-001 via subcutaneous injection to match and potentially exceed the reported efficacy of the highest dose of INCA033989 that was intravenously administered in Incyte’s Phase 1 trial. We believe such a subcutaneous formulation is critically important for the treatment of ET patients because it provides a more convenient dosing option for such patients, some of whom have a life expectancy of at least 35 years after diagnosis and thus require long-term treatment. We intend to file an Investigational New Drug application (“IND”), or equivalent, for DMR-001 in mid-2026 and initiate a Phase 1 trial in ET and MF patients with a subcutaneous formulation thereafter, subject to regulatory approval.

In addition, we are developing DMR-002 and DMR-003, both anti-mutCALR-based therapies, with the intent to ultimately address the full spectrum of mutCALR MPN patients. We intend to file an IND or Clinical Trial Notification, or equivalent, for DMR-002 in the second half of 2026 and for DMR-003 in 2027.

GB3226 is a small molecule product candidate which we intend to develop to treat AML, a highly aggressive leukemia. Firstline therapy for AML typically involves cytotoxic chemotherapy, a treatment regimen that has tolerability issues and that especially older patients cannot tolerate. These patients and those in whom the disease is not otherwise controlled are treated with a number of targeted therapies that address specific genetic alterations that lead to AML. Unfortunately, these therapies fail to result in long-term disease suppression in the majority of patients.

We believe that GB3226 can overcome some of these limitations through its ability to simultaneously inhibit two targets that are key drivers of AML. The first of these is ENL YEATS, a transcription regulator that is implicated in AML pathogenesis through genetic alterations. The second is FLT3, a clinically validated target. We believe that GB3226 has the potential to limit the ability of AML cells to develop resistance by requiring changes in two independent pathways. The superior anti-tumor activity of GB3226 compared to approved AML therapies has been demonstrated preclinically. We intend to file an IND for GB3226 in AML patients in the first quarter of 2026.

Our Pipeline

The following table summarizes our product candidates and programs and their current stage of development.

LOGO

Our Strategy

Our goal is to develop potential best-in-class therapies to treat a range of hematologic malignancies, including AML and MPNs such as ET and MF. Our strategy to achieve this is as follows:

•

Initiate clinical development of DMR-001. Our preclinical results have shown that DMR-001 has improved potency and pharmacokinetics compared to a reference antibody with the same mechanism of action as INCA033989, a molecule for which impressive Phase 1 clinical results in the treatment of ET and initial data in MF have been reported. We plan to file an IND or equivalent for DMR-001 for the treatment of ET and MF patients in mid-2026 and initiate a Phase 1 trial in ET and MF patients with a subcutaneous formulation thereafter, subject to regulatory approval.

•

Invest early in preparation for late-stage development of DMR-001. Although DMR-001 is not the first anti-mutCALR antibody to enter the clinic, we believe that it has the potential to be best-in-class. We intend to be in a position to execute additional clinical trials for DMR-001 in response to both the results that we generate and to those of our competitors, with the intent of minimizing unnecessary delays.

•

Advance DMR-002 and DMR-003 into clinical development. We are developing mutCALR targeted therapies that are designed to be even more potent than DMR-001 with the goal of addressing the full spectrum of mutCALR-driven MPNs. We anticipate filing an IND or equivalent for DMR-002 in the second half of 2026 and for DMR-003 in 2027.

•

Initiate clinical development of GB3226. We believe that the dual action of GB3226 provides an opportunity to demonstrate improved and more durable anti-tumor activity than current therapies. We intend to file an IND for GB3226 in patients with AML in the first quarter of 2026.

MPNs – a spectrum of diseases with high unmet medical need

MPNs are a group of rare blood cancers in which excess red blood cells, white blood cells or platelets are produced in the bone marrow. The three most common MPNs are MF, ET, and polycythemia vera (“PV”). Common symptoms of MPNs include fatigue, itching, weight loss, night sweats, fever, difficulty breathing, abdominal swelling and discomfort due to spleen enlargement, bruising and stroke, all of which can be devastating and debilitating. Patients with ET and PV can progress to MF, and all MPN patients have a risk that their cancer progresses into AML, a hematological malignancy with a five-year survival rate of 33% .

MPNs generally arise from mutations in the blood-forming stem cells of the bone marrow. The most commonly mutated genes observed in MPNs are Janus-associated kinase 2 (“JAK2”), CALR, and myeloproliferative leukemia virus oncogene (“MPL”). These mutations lead to constitutive or always-on activation of signaling pathways that, when over-activated, drive the aberrant production of blood cells.

DMR-001, a product candidate designed to treat mutCALR-driven MPNs

DMR-001 is a monoclonal antibody that targets mutCALR, a mutant protein that is believed to be a critical driver of approximately 25% of ET cases and 35% of MF cases. Third-party phase 1 clinical data for INCA033989, an anti-mutCALR antibody, demonstrated that direct targeting of mutCALR can lead to rapid and sustained reduction in excess platelets, the key pathology in ET. DMR-001 is designed to improve on the clinical activity and pharmacokinetics of INCA033989, which we believe will provide the opportunity to capture a sizable portion of the mutCALR ET market. We anticipate filing an IND, or equivalent, for DMR-001 in mid-2026 and initiating a Phase 1 trial in ET and MF patients with a subcutaneous formulation thereafter, subject to regulatory approval.

ET background

ET, an MPN with excessive platelet production, is associated with an increased risk of thrombosis and bleeding. The annual incidence of ET in the United States is 1.5/100,000 persons. The prevalence in the United States is approximately 140,000 patients.

Excessive levels of platelets in ET are associated with increased risk of serious conditions such as arterial thrombosis, venous thrombosis and hemorrhagic complications. In addition, patients with ET can experience symptoms that include tingling or burning in the hands and feet, headache, visual problems, weakness and dizziness. These symptoms and others result from excessive numbers of platelets causing blockages in small or large blood vessels in different parts of the body that can reduce patients’ quality of life. More serious potential complications include an increased risk of blood clots, causing heart attacks and strokes, as well as an increase in the risk of hemorrhage that rises with the platelet count. The median age at diagnosis of ET is 59 years. ET is considered a chronic disease in most patients with a median overall survival that exceeds 35 years in those diagnosed at 40 years or younger. A significant fraction of ET patients, progress to more aggressive cancers, including 17% who develop MF and 3% who develop AML.

Approximately 90% of individuals with ET have genetic variants that upregulate the JAK-STAT signaling pathway, including JAK2, CALR or MPL, which encodes the thrombopoietin (“TPO”) receptor.

LOGO

Figure 1. Mutations that drive JAK/STAT signaling, including those in JAK2, CALR and MPL are the primary causes of ET

The main treatment objective for patients with ET is to lower platelet levels to the normal range. About 30% to 40% of ET patients are classified as lower-risk patients who have elevated platelet counts without a history of clotting events. These patients are often treated with aspirin alone. The remaining ET patients carry a higher risk of clotting and bleeding. These patients are generally treated with hydroxyurea, which is not approved for the treatment of ET in the United States. Hydroxyurea does not alter the underlying disease process and, as a result, disease progression may continue in some patients. Long-term use of hydroxyurea is also associated with the development of mucosal ulcers, actinic keratosis and an increased risk of skin cancer. Anagrelide, an inhibitor of the maturation of megakaryocytes to platelets, is approved to treat ET but is associated with cardiotoxicity. Although 59% of ET patients have mutations in JAK2, inhibitors of JAK kinase, such as ruxolitinib, are not routinely used. Ruxolitinib is not approved to treat ET, as it failed to improve response rates and is associated with a number of toxicities that are barriers to widespread use. Interferon has also been reported to reduce platelet counts in ET patients in a small number of clinical trials, but it has not been approved for this indication.

MF disease overview

MF is a MPN characterized by abnormal myeloid cell proliferation leading to inflammation and a fibrotic response in the bone marrow. This results in bone marrow scarring, splenomegaly, elevated cytokine levels, and marrow dysfunction. Symptoms include fatigue, easy bruising and bleeding, night sweats and fever. At the time of diagnosis, 35% to 54% of patients with MF have anemia. Within a year of diagnosis, 60% of patients develop anemia and 46% of all patients require treatment with red blood transfusions. Anemia is the disease feature most consistently associated with poor prognosis in MF. Up to 20% of MF patients will ultimately develop AML.

Because the median age of MF diagnosis is around 65 years, disease-associated complications are often compounded by concurring medical conditions such as diabetes, hypertension, atherosclerotic or pulmonary disease, and obesity. Patients with intermediate-risk disease have a median overall survival of about five years which decreases to two years in those with high-risk disease. Common fatal complications include transformation into AML, thrombohemorrhagic events, organ failure, and infections. The prevalence of MF in the United States is estimated at 20,000 patients.

LOGO

Figure 2. Median overall survival for patients with MF

Current treatments for MF

The only current curative treatment for MF is allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (“HSCT”); however, this procedure has both significant morbidity and a high mortality rate. Because many patients diagnosed with MF are elderly and have other comorbidities, only a minority are eligible for this treatment. In other patients, inhibitors of cell proliferation are used such as JAK kinase inhibitors or chemotherapy agents.

These therapies, however, increase the risk of anemia, reduce platelet counts causing increased risk of bleeding and bruising, and reduce white blood cell counts, a condition known as neutropenia, resulting in increased risk of serious infections.

Management of anemia can be one of the most challenging aspects of treating patients with MF. In patients with mild anemia, erythropoiesis stimulating agents, are used to stimulate red blood cell formation. Other patients are treated with steroids, including danazol, which lead to increases in hemoglobin (“Hb”), levels with a mean response time of five months in 30% of patients. Patients with more serious anemia are treated with blood transfusions, but over time, repeated transfusions lead to the development of iron overload, alloantibodies, and other toxicities.

We believe there remains a substantial unmet need for new therapies that can reduce disease symptoms and slow progression for MF patients.

Potential of targeting mutCALR

We believe that mutCALR is a highly desirable target in oncology given its clear role as a disease driver. CALR normally functions as a calcium-binding chaperone that is active in three areas: intracellularly, on the cell surface, and extracellularly. However, in patients who have deleterious mutations, the gene for CALR is mutated so that the DNA transcription machinery does not stick to the normal reading frame. This so-called frameshift occurs in the protein-coding region of the gene and it results in the synthesis of mutCALR proteins that contain an amino acid sequence at the C-terminal end of the protein that is not present in normal CALR. In response to this additional sequence, these mutCALR proteins begin to drive abnormal cell proliferation by gaining the ability to bind to and stimulate signaling through a receptor known as the TPO receptor. TPO activation, in turn, activates the JAK/STAT pathway, a well-known pathway leading to cell proliferation. It is this JAK/STAT pathway activation which, in turn, drives the unhealthy proliferation of myeloid cells.

LOGO

Figure 3. mutCALR leads to TPO-independent activation of JAK/STAT signaling

The majority of CALR mutations associated with ET are classified as Type 1 mutations (52 bp deletion) or Type 2 mutations (5 bp insertion) depending on the size and location of the frameshift causing genetic changes. Both Type 1 and Type 2 mutations result in a novel, shared mutant C-terminal domain.

LOGO

Figure 4. Two types of mutCALR account for 85% of CALR mutations in ET

In addition to the critical role of mutCALR in stimulating cell proliferation, several other factors make mutCALR an especially attractive drug target. First, the frameshift mutations that create mutCALR lead to the expression of a protein domain that is not present in wild-type (“WT”) CALR, thereby providing an opportunity to specifically target mutCALR and avoid potential consequences of binding to CALR on healthy cells. Second, due to the deletion of the ER-localization signal that occurs when mutated, mutCALR localizes to the cell surface while WT CALR does not. Third, the pathology of mutCALR appears to be limited to its ability to activate the TPO receptor which is primarily expressed on platelets and hematopoietic progenitor cells that give rise to platelets, providing the ability to selectively and specifically target the root cause of the pathological cell proliferation. Fourth, mutations in CALR are mutually exclusive with other driver mutations, providing an opportunity to block oncogenic signaling through selective mutCALR inhibition with less potential for resistance.

A recent third-party advancement in the treatment of ET

In June 2025, Incyte announced results from two Phase 1 clinical trials of INCA033989 which included ET patients resistant or intolerant to prior cytoreductive therapy. Incyte reported that intravenous doses of INCA033989 led to a rapid and sustained reduction in platelets. Furthermore, biweekly doses greater than 400 mg were associated with a trend towards improved responses.

INCA033989 was well tolerated with no dose-limiting toxicities in this trial. There was only one discontinuation out of 49 patients treated due to a treatment-emergent adverse event.

Single cell sequencing in clinical responders showed that INCA033989 reduced the percentage of cells carrying mutCALR including early blood-forming cells and cells in the myeloid-lineage. At the same time, there was a

clear increase in cells expressing normal CALR, suggesting that the treatment supports the return of normal blood production. Bone marrow biopsies further confirmed these effects and demonstrated fewer megakaryocytes expressing mutCALR protein and a notable increase in megakaryocytes not expressing mutCALR protein. Together, these findings demonstrated that INCA033989 led to a rapid decrease in platelets as well as a trend towards normalization of healthy hematopoiesis. Further, deep reductions in the frequency of mutCALR alleles, also known as variant allele frequency (“VAF”), were reported at the higher doses tested, with 47% and 21% of evaluated patients achieving greater than 20% and greater than 50% VAF reductions, respectively. These findings are consistent with our belief that an anti-mutCALR antibody has the potential to trigger a rapid hematologic response and to result in long-term disease modification.

Results reported from the Phase 1 trials of INCA033989 showed an overall response rate of 83%, however the response to treatment was lower in patients with Type 2 mutCALR compared to those with Type 1 mutations. We believe that these results demonstrate both the clinical potential of anti-mutCALR therapy in ET and the need for more potent therapies against Type 2 mutations, which represent a third of mutCALR patients.

Our solution, DMR-001

DMR-001 is an anti-mutCALR monoclonal antibody designed to improve the ability to treat all patients that have either Type 1 or Type 2 mutCALR. DMR-001 is engineered to have improved potency against both Type 1 and Type 2 mutCALR, which we believe will provide the potential to treat patients with both classes of mutations at lower doses than may be required using INCA033989. Furthermore, DMR-001 contains modifications that are known to increase the half-life of antibodies in circulation. We believe that the increased potency and associated improvements in the half-life of DMR-001 will enable infrequent subcutaneous dosing and result in more convenience for patients compared to treatment with INCA033989, which is currently dosed by intravenous infusion every two weeks.

In our preclinical studies, DMR-001 demonstrated approximately three-fold greater inhibition of cell proliferation of a cell line that is dependent on Type 1 mutCALR than a reference mutCALR antibody with the same mechanism of action as INCA033989. In this in vitro assay, the proliferation of Ba/F3 cells was engineered to be dependent on Type 1 mutCALR and the TPO receptor. At 72 hours, DMR-001 led to more potent inhibition of proliferation than the reference antibody.

LOGO

Figure 5. DMR-001 was more potent than a reference mutCALR antibody in a Type 1 mutCALR-dependent cell assay

In a similar assay in which the Ba/F3 cells were engineered to be dependent on a Type 2 mutCALR, DMR-001 had an approximately ten-fold greater inhibition of cell proliferation than the reference antibody.

LOGO

Figure 6. DMR-001 was more potent than a reference mutCALR antibody in a Type 2 mutCALR-dependent cell assay

High-molecular-weight biologics, such as antibodies, are routinely dosed via intravenous or subcutaneous administration. Subcutaneous administration has certain advantages in that patients can be dosed either during a clinic visit or via self-administered dosing at home, e.g., with an auto-injector, instead of receiving an hours-long intravenous administration in a hospital or infusion center. Subcutaneous administration is not only more convenient and desirable to patients, it also reduces the burden on healthcare facilities by lowering the cost of administration and increasing the number of patients who can be treated in a given time. The ability to administer treatment by subcutaneous injection is especially important for the treatment of chronic diseases, such as ET, for which patients may require treatment over years or even decades.

DMR-001 has been engineered to have an extended half-life based on specific modifications that have been shown to extend the half-life of antibodies by three- to four-fold in other third-party therapies. In our preclinical studies, DMR-001 had a five-fold longer half-life in NHPs compared to a reference mutCALR antibody that lacked these modifications. We believe that the extended half-life observed in NHPs with DMR-001 has the potential to carry over into clinical development, as the half-life of other antibodies in NHPs, including those engineered to have extended half-lives, has been shown to correlate with that observed in humans.

LOGO

Figure 7. DMR-001 had a five-fold longer half-life in non-human primates than a reference mutCALR antibody

We believe that the potential combination of the increased potency of DMR-001 combined with its longer half-life provides the opportunity to gain a competitive advantage to existing anti-mutCALR antibodies in development, such as INCA033989. We believe the combination of these enhancements provides the opportunity for low doses of DMR-001 to be administered subcutaneously using an autoinjector and for DMR-001 potentially to be administered less frequently than INCA033989.

To estimate the potential impact of the increased potency and the improved half-life of DMR-001, we modeled the pharmacokinetics of DMR-001 and compared that to the maximum dose of 2500 mg INCA033989 that was tested and led to clinical responses in Incyte’s Phase 1 trials. We believe that it is feasible for subcutaneous doses administered approximately every four weeks or less frequently to deliver sufficient DMR-001 to match what is known as the C_trough, the lowest concentration of drug substance before administration of the subsequent dose, of 2500 mg of INCA033989 when INCA033989 is delivered intravenously biweekly. We note that this analysis is based on an improvement in activity against Type 2 mutCALR for DMR-001 of only two-fold, which is substantially lower than the ten-fold improvement that we observed in our in vitro experiments.

We believe that the increased potency and improved pharmacokinetics of DMR-001 as well as the anticipated subcutaneous doses have the potential for DMR-001 to match doses of INCA033989 that have demonstrated meaningful clinical results in ET in third party clinical trials. We believe that the improved properties of DMR-001 may provide the opportunity to not only simplify dosing, but also to increase the response rates in ET patients with Type 2 mutCALR mutations.

LOGO

Figure 8. Pharmacologic modeling suggests that subcutaneous doses of DMR-001 can match the clinical activity of the highest dose of INCA033989 tested in the clinic

We anticipate filing an IND, or equivalent, in mid-2026 and initiating a Phase 1 trial of a subcutaneous formulation in ET and MF patients thereafter, subject to regulatory approval.

DMR-002 and DMR-003

Although ET is a chronic disease that typically requires lifelong management, about 17% of patients with mutCALR ET progress to MF, a life-threatening condition. In addition, primary MF can occur, where patients are newly diagnosed with MF without any contributing progression from ET. Primary MF has an incidence in the United States of 3,700 to 3,900 new patients per year. Third-party clinical data of INCA033989 demonstrated promising activity as a monotherapy and as a combination therapy in reducing anemia and spleen volume, as well as improving symptoms in mutCALR MF patients. We anticipate that some MF patients with mutCALR may also respond to DMR-001 treatment.

In addition, we are developing two additional anti-mutCALR product candidates: DMR-002 and DMR-003, a bispecific CD3 x anti-mutCALR T cell engager. We plan to disclose specifics about both of these product candidates as they advance into formal clinical development. We anticipate filing an IND, or equivalent, for DMR-002 in the second half of 2026 and for DMR-003 in 2027.

GB3226 for the treatment of AML

GB3226 is a dual inhibitor of two drivers of AML progression: ENL YEATS and FLT3. GB3226 has been shown to have potent anti-tumor activity in animal models. We plan to submit an IND to evaluate GB3226 in AML in the first quarter of 2026.

AML disease background

AML is a hematologic malignancy characterized by excessive proliferation of myeloid stem cells and their failure to properly differentiate into mature blood cells. AML is the second most common subtype of leukemia in adults. There are an estimated 22,000 new diagnoses of AML each year in the United States. AML is generally a disease of older people, with more than 60% of diagnosed patients older than 60 years. The average five-year survival rate for patients with AML is 32.9%, but there are significant differences in prognosis depending on several factors including the age of the patient at diagnosis and the genetic driver of disease.

The recommended treatment for AML for patients younger than 60 years and for older patients who can tolerate intensive chemotherapy is a regimen referred to as 7+3. Patients undergoing this regimen are dosed continuously for seven days with cytarabine along with short infusions of daunorubicin on days one through three. This is a very toxic and taxing treatment. Patients who cannot tolerate this therapy can be treated with a combination of venetoclax, marketed as Venclexta^® by AbbVie Inc., and chemotoxins such as azacytidine, decitabine, or low-dose cytarabine. A subset of patients can be treated with one of several targeted therapies approved for the treatment of AML: enasidenib for patients with mutations in IDH2, marketed as Idhifa^® by Bristol Myers Squibb Company and Servier Pharmaceuticals (“Servier”); ivosidenib for patients with mutations in IDH1, marketed as Tibsovo^® by Servier; revumenib for patients with KMT2A rearrangements or nucleophosmin-1 gene (“NPM1”) mutations (“NPM1m”), marketed as Revuforj^® by Syndax Pharmaceuticals Inc.; ziftomenib for patients with NPM1m, marketed as Komzifti^® by Kura Oncology, Inc. and Kyowa Kirin Co., Ltd.; and a series of drugs approved for patients with genetic alterations in FLT3 including gilteritinib, marketed as Xospata^® by Astellas Pharma Inc., and quizartinib, marketed as Vanflyta^® by Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.

Neither intensive chemotherapy nor targeted therapies are curative in most patients. The primary goal of these therapies is to induce disease remission, allowing the patient to undergo a potentially curative HSCT.

Despite these advances, for patients who do achieve remission, five-year survival is only 30% to 40% because the majority of patients relapse. Patients in the elderly population have a far worse prognosis with a five-year survival rate of less than 10%. There remains a significant need for safe, durable and broadly effective AML treatments.

The global AML therapy market is estimated at over $3 billion currently and is projected to grow significantly to over $6 billion by 2030 driven by sales of existing and new targeted agents.

Therapeutic potential of inhibitors of ENL YEATS and FLT3 in AML

Epigenetics is a central mechanism of gene regulation. Whereas DNA code holds the instructions for making RNA and protein, epigenetics controls which sections of the DNA are read in specific cells. Points of epigenetic intervention include the so-called histones, the backbone proteins that DNA is wrapped around in the nucleus, as well as regulatory proteins such as transcription factors. Intervening at the level of transcription factors or histones can bring powerful control to cell proliferation. The chromatin reader eleven–nineteen leukemia (“ENL”) protein, acts as a transcription factor, binding to acetylated histone through a protein domain called the YEATS domain.

The human genome encodes four YEATS domain-containing proteins: ENL, AF9, GAS41 and YEATS2. These proteins have been found in nuclear complexes with a variety of molecular functions spanning chromatin remodeling, histone modification and transcription, and they have been increasingly implicated in various cancers. In leukemia, ENL and its paralog, AF9, are frequently fused with the mixed lineage leukemia protein, MLL1, also known as KMT2A, as a result of chromosomal translocations. Once bound to acetylated histones, ENL can stabilize transcription machinery on target genes, leading to increased gene expression and the growth

of leukemia cells. Deletion of ENL or disruption of its binding to acetylated histones has been shown to decrease leukemia burden and increase survival in mouse models of leukemia. By contrast, loss of ENL has minimal effects on the survival of normal hemopoietic stem cells in culture.

Another drug target found in leukemias, Fms-like tyrosine kinase 3 (“FLT3”), is a receptor tyrosine kinase that plays a role in early hematopoiesis. Upon binding to the FLT3 ligand, FLT3 receptors activate and dimerize, leading to conformational change, cellular proliferation, and inhibition of apoptosis and differentiation. Activating mutations in FLT3 are found in approximately 30% of AML patients, representing the most frequent genetic alteration in the disease. Small molecule inhibitors of FLT3 have been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), but their impact is limited due to the development of resistance mutations and poor tolerability that limits their potential as a combination partner in earlier line settings.

Our solution, GB3226

GB3226 is a small molecule that inhibits both ENL YEATS and FLT3. We believe that the combination of these two mechanisms in one molecule provides an advantage over other therapeutic approaches to treat AML. We anticipate that the rapid anti-tumor activity of FLT3 will be complemented by the long-term anti-tumor activity offered by ENL YEATS inhibition. In addition, we believe that simultaneously inhibiting both pathways will reduce the likelihood that resistance to GB3226 will arise through single point mutations in either target.

In our mouse xenograft model using human MV4-11 leukemia cells, treatment with doses as low as 25 mg/kg twice daily (“BID”), led to reductions in tumor size. Tumors were no longer measurable after seven days of treatment with 50 mg/kg BID or higher GB3226 with reductions sustained after dosing ended. Treatment with GB3226 led to a dose-dependent reduction in key genetic drivers of leukemogenesis and maintenance such as HOXA9 and MEIS1.

LOGO

Figure 9. GB3226 had anti-tumor activity in an MV-4-11 xenograft model

Treatment with GB3226 led to significant improvements in survival in a separate MV4-11 mouse model compared to existing therapies approved to treat AML. In this model treatment with GB3226 led to significant improvement in survival compared to gilteritinib, a small molecule FLT3 inhibitor, and SNDX-5613, a third-party menin inhibitor now known as revumenib.

LOGO

Figure 10. Treatment with GB3226 led to statistically significant improvements in survival in a MV-4-11 model compared to gilteritinib and revumenib

No statistically significant changes in QTc prolongation in dogs have been observed with GB3226 at a dose of 100 mg/kg. Changes in QTc are common side effects of some kinase inhibitors such as FLT3 inhibitors as well as with revumenib. We intend to file an IND for GB3226 with the FDA in the first quarter of 2026. The proposed Phase 1 trial is designed as an open-label, dose-escalation and expansion trial to evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and preliminary efficacy of GB3226, as well as biomarker analyses, including MYC, MEIS1, HOXA9 and FLT3 to further characterize the therapeutic potential of GB3226 in adults with relapsed or refractory AML.

We anticipate that an ENL-YEATS and FLT3 inhibitor such as GB3226 may have the potential to address a broad portion of the AML patient population, including those patients with high-risk genetic mutations. Our preclinical models have demonstrated that GB3226 is active against AML driven by rearrangement of mixed lineage leukemia-1 gene (“KMT2A”), mutation of NPM1 and FLT3-driven AML. We believe that GB3226 is also well-positioned to address the menin-resistant population within AML. Acute leukemias driven by KMT2A or NPM1, require the chromatin adapter protein menin, encoded by the MEN1 gene, to sustain aberrant leukemogenic gene expression programs. Somatic mutations in MEN1 have been identified in patients with acquired resistance to menin inhibition. Consistent with the genetic data in patients, inhibitor-menin interface mutations represent a conserved mechanism of therapeutic resistance in xenograft models and in an unbiased base-editor screen. These mutants attenuate drug-target binding by generating structural perturbations that impact small-molecule binding but not the interaction with the natural ligand MLL1 and prevent inhibitor-induced eviction of menin and MLL1 from chromatin. Inhibition of ENL and the subsequent decrease of target gene expression occurs independent of presence of menin and is not negatively impacted by MEN1 mutations, which suggests that this therapeutic resistance could potentially be addressed by GB3226.

Our Team and Investors

On November 10, 2025, we announced the completion of the Asset Acquisition with the focus on advancing a pipeline of next-generation antibodies targeting mutCALR with respect to which we have the option to acquire intellectual property license rights pursuant to the Paragon Option Agreement. The antibodies subject to the Paragon Option Agreement were discovered and developed by Paragon, a biotechnology company applying cutting-edge science and technology to shape the next generation of novel best-in-class complex biologics for major medical needs. Paragon’s scientific founders’ discoveries have also led to the creation of five other successful, publicly traded biotechnology companies.

Concurrent with the closing of the Asset Acquisition, we completed a $285 million private placement of our Series C Preferred Stock with a syndicate of healthcare investors led by Fairmount Funds Management LLC, with participation from Viking Global Investors, Venrock Healthcare Capital Partners, Commodore Capital, Janus Henderson Investors, Wellington Management, RA Capital Management, TCGX, Forbion, BB Biotech, Blackstone Multi-Asset Investing, Perceptive Advisors, Vestal Point Capital, Balyasny Asset Management, Andreessen Horowitz (a16z Bio + Health), and a leading life sciences investment firm.

We have a strong management team, board of directors and group of employees with diverse backgrounds and significant experience in developing novel treatments for patients at biopharmaceutical companies such as CRISPR Therapeutics, Cogent Biosciences, Jade Biosciences, Oruka Therapeutics, Apogee Therapeutics, Spyre Therapeutics, Ultragenyx, Roche/Genentech, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Maxygen, Spring Bank, and Bridge Medicines. Together, our team has a proven track record in the discovery, development, and commercialization of numerous approved therapeutics.

Recent Developments

On November 10, 2025, we effected the Asset Acquisition to acquire Damora in accordance with the terms of the Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Acquisition Agreement”), by and among the Company, Daylight Merger Sub I, Inc., a Delaware corporation and a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company (“First Merger Sub”), Daylight Merger Sub II, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company and wholly owned subsidiary of the Company (“Second Merger Sub”), and Damora. Pursuant to the Acquisition Agreement, First Merger Sub merged with and into Damora, pursuant to which Damora was the surviving corporation and became a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company (the “First Merger”). Immediately following the First Merger, Damora merged with and into Second Merger Sub, pursuant to which Second Merger Sub was the surviving entity.

The Asset Acquisition was structured as a stock-for-stock transaction pursuant to which all of Damora’s outstanding equity interests were exchanged based on a fixed exchange ratio of 1-for-1.6366, for consideration of a combination of 265,309 shares of Common Stock, 16,366 shares of Series B Preferred Stock (or 16,366,000 shares on an as-converted-to-Common Stock basis), and 4,241 shares of Series C Preferred Stock (or 4,241,000 shares on an as-converted-to-Common Stock basis), in addition to the assumption of outstanding and unexercised stock options to purchase 434,508 shares of Common Stock from the Damora 2025 Equity Incentive Plan.

With respect to the Asset Acquisition, we determined that Galecto was the acquiror for accounting purposes under ASC 805-10-25-4 and ASC 805-10-55-11. The primary factors considered were (a) the relative voting rights in the combined entity not resulting in a change of control, (b) legacy members of our board of directors maintained control of the board, and (c) the composition of senior management remained the same at the closing of the Transactions. Next, we considered whether the Asset Acquisition should be defined as a business under ASC 805. ASC 805-10-55-5A through 55-5C describe a screen test to determine whether an acquired set of assets and activities is not a business. We determined that substantially all (greater than 90%) of the fair value of the assets acquired were concentrated in a single asset, Damora’s Option to license intellectual property rights related to DMR-001, DMR-002, and DMR-003 pursuant to the Paragon Option Agreement. Accordingly, we

treated the Asset Acquisition as an asset acquisition for accounting purposes. Even if the transaction would have failed the screen test, Damora lacked the financial resources to have inputs, processes, and outputs to constitute a business under ASC 805. Following the Asset Acquisition, we will need to invest in infrastructure and the continuing research and development being conducted under the Paragon Option Agreement to be able to have any measurable outputs.

Concurrently with the Asset Acquisition, we entered into a securities purchase agreement (the “Securities Purchase Agreement”) for a PIPE investment with existing and new investors (the “Investors”) to raise approximately $285 million in which the Investors were issued 39,641 shares of Series C Preferred Stock (or 39,641,000 shares on an as-converted-to-Common Stock basis) at a price of $7,186.90 per share (or $7.1869 per share on an as-converted-to-Common Stock basis). The PIPE transaction closed on November 12, 2025.

The Transactions were approved by our board of directors and the board of directors and stockholders of Damora. The closings of the Transactions were not subject to the approval of Galecto stockholders. Subject to the Conversion Approval and certain beneficial ownership limitations set by each holder, each share of Series B Preferred Stock will be convertible at the option of the holder into 1,000 shares of Common Stock and each share of Series C Preferred Stock will automatically convert into 1,000 shares of Common Stock. We expect to file a proxy statement with the SEC to solicit such Conversion Approval, among other matters, at a special meeting of Galecto stockholders (the “Special Meeting”). Except as otherwise required by law (e.g. voting on a change to the authorized shares of Series B Preferred Stock or the rights of such shares as required by Delaware General Corporation Law) and the Certificate of Designation of Series B Non-Voting Convertible Preferred Stock (the “Series B Certificate of Designation”), the Series B Preferred Stock does not have voting rights. Except as otherwise required by law (e.g. voting on a change to the authorized shares of Series C Preferred Stock or the rights of such shares as required by Delaware General Corporation Law) and the Certificate of Designation of Series C Non-Voting Convertible Preferred Stock (the “Series C Certificate of Designation”), the Series C Preferred Stock does not have voting rights. For more information on the Series B Preferred Stock and the Series C Preferred Stock, please refer to the Series B Certificate of Designation and the Series C Certificate of Designation, respectively, which are incorporated by reference herein and attached as Exhibit 3.1 of our Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on November 10, 2025 and as Exhibit 3.1 of our Current Report on Form 8-K/A filed with the SEC on December 9, 2025, respectively.

In connection with the execution of the Acquisition Agreement, Galecto and Damora entered into stockholder support agreements (the “Support Agreements”) with certain of Galecto’s officers and directors (together with affiliated entities), which collectively own an aggregate of approximately 3.0% of the outstanding shares of Common Stock. The Support Agreements provide that, among other things, each of the parties thereto has agreed to vote or cause to be voted all of the shares of Common Stock owned by such stockholder in favor of the Conversion Approval at the Special Meeting.

Concurrently and in connection with the execution of the Acquisition Agreement, certain Damora stockholders as of immediately prior to the Asset Acquisition, and certain of the directors and officers of Galecto as of immediately prior to the Asset Acquisition entered into lock-up agreements with Galecto and Damora, pursuant to which each such stockholder will be subject to a 180-day lockup on the sale or transfer of shares of Common Stock held by each such stockholder at the closing of the Asset Acquisition, including those shares received by such Damora stockholders in the Asset Acquisition.

For more information about the Transactions, you should refer to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on November 10, 2025, which is incorporated by reference herein.

Corporation Information

We were founded as Galecto Biotech AB, a Swedish company, in 2011 and incorporated in Delaware as Galecto, Inc. in October 2019. On November 10, 2025, we completed the Asset Acquisition, pursuant to which we assumed the rights and obligations of Damora under the Paragon Option Agreement, and all of Damora’s outstanding equity interests were exchanged based on a fixed exchange ratio of 1 to 1.6366 for consideration from Galecto of 265,309 shares of Common Stock, 16,366 shares of Series B Preferred Stock (or 16,366,000 shares on an as-converted-to-Common Stock basis), and 4,241 shares of Series C Preferred Stock (or 4,241,000 shares on an as-converted-to-Common Stock basis), in addition to the assumption of outstanding and unexercised stock options to purchase 434,508 shares of Common Stock from the Damora 2025 Equity Incentive Plan. In addition, in October 2024, we acquired the global rights to Bridge Medicines LLC’s (“Bridge Medicines”) GB3226 (formerly BRM-1420) program, a novel dual ENL-YEATS and FLT3 inhibitor for multiple genetic subsets of AML, and assumed certain of Bridge Medicines’ liabilities associated with the acquired assets. Our principal executive offices are located at Ole Maaloes Vej 3s, DK-2200 Copenhagen N, Denmark and 75 State Street, Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109, and our telephone number is (+45) 70 70 52 10.

Our Relationship with Fairmount, Paragon and Paramora

In connection with the Asset Acquisition, we assumed the rights and obligations of Damora under the Paragon Option Agreement. Paragon and Paramora each beneficially own more than 5% of a class of our voting securities through their respective holdings of our Common Stock, although neither are expected to own more than 5% following the Conversion Approval. Fairmount beneficially owns more than 5% of Paragon, appointed Paragon’s board of directors, and has the contractual right to approve the appointment of any executive officers of Paragon. Paramora is an entity formed by Paragon as a vehicle to hold equity in Damora (and as a result of the Asset Acquisition, us) in order to share profits with certain employees of Paragon and will not perform any substantive role under the Paragon Option Agreement other than to receive warrants expected to be granted to Paramora under the Paragon Option Agreement. Three of our directors are affiliated with Fairmount (Peter Harwin, Christopher Cain, Ph.D., and Julianne Bruno) and were appointed in accordance with the Acquisition Agreement. We consider Paragon, Paramora, and Fairmount to be related parties. See the section titled “Paragon Option Agreement” below for more information on the Paragon Option Agreement.

Paragon Option Agreement

On October 7, 2025, Damora entered into the Paragon Option Agreement with Paragon and Paramora. In connection with the Asset Acquisition, we assumed the rights and obligations of Damora under the Paragon Option Agreement. Under the terms of the Paragon Option Agreement, Paragon agreed to perform certain research activities to discover, generate, identify, and characterize one or more antibody candidates directed to certain mutually agreed therapeutic targets of interest (each, a “Research Program”). The Paragon Option Agreement includes mutCALR as the selected target for DMR-001 and DMR-002, and mutCALR and CD3 as the selected targets for DMR-003. From time to time, we may choose to add additional targets to the Paragon Option Agreement by mutual agreement with Paragon and Paramora.

The Paragon Option Agreement requires us, Paragon, and Paramora to develop a research plan for each target that includes design, modeling, synthesis, evaluation, and other mutually agreed activities (each, a “Research Plan”), which activities primarily include performing preclinical studies. Paragon will perform the activities set forth in each Research Plan on the timelines set forth in such Research Plan and in compliance with a mutually agreed budget. Each Research Program will be overseen and coordinated by a joint development committee consisting of two of our employees and two employees from Paragon, with us and Paragon each having one vote with respect to decisions of the committee. When Paragon and Paramora have produced an antibody against a selected target, and upon the completion of each Research Program, Paragon and Paramora will deliver to us a data package that includes sequence information for all then-existing antibodies and information directed to such

target. We, Paragon, and Paramora have developed a Research Plan for each of DMR-001, DMR-002, and DMR-003 consistent with the foregoing, and Paragon and Paramora have delivered an antibody against mutCALR with respect to DMR-001 in accordance with the applicable Research Plan.

Under the Paragon Option Agreement, we have an option (an “Option”), on a Research Program-by-Research Program basis, to enter into a separate agreement with Paragon consistent with a set of pre-negotiated terms (a “License Agreement”). Each License Agreement will include (a) an exclusive, worldwide license to all of Paragon’s right, title, and interest in and to the intellectual property resulting from the applicable Research Program to develop, manufacture, and commercialize the antibodies and products directed to the selected target(s), and (b), for DMR-001 and DMR-002, a non-exclusive, worldwide license to all of Paragon’s right, title, and interest in and to the intellectual property resulting from the applicable monospecific Research Program to develop, manufacture, and commercialize multispecific antibodies and products directed to the selected target(s). Additionally, each License Agreement under the Paragon Option Agreement will include a non-exclusive, worldwide license to certain patents controlled by Paragon or its affiliates that (i) include a claim that expressly recites the sequence of the monospecific or bispecific antibody, as applicable, or the derived antibodies applicable to the Research Program, and (ii) are necessary to develop, manufacture or commercialize the monospecific or bispecific antibody, as applicable, or the derived antibodies applicable to the Research Program, but exclude any patents owned or otherwise controlled by Paragon or its affiliates that cover (x) that antigen-binding portion of any antibody or moiety that is directed to a target other than the target(s) of the Research Program (e.g., a second binder in a multispecific antibody), (y) any portion of any multispecific antibody other than an antibody directed to the target(s) of the Research Program, and (z) the composition of matter of, or any method of specifically making or using, a multispecific antibody directed to targets other than the target(s) of the Research Program that is developed, manufactured, commercialized or otherwise exploited by Paragon or its affiliate or sublicensee (other than us and our affiliates and sublicensees). The Option with respect to each Research Program is exercisable at our sole discretion at any time during the period beginning on the initiation of activities under the associated Research Program and ending a specified number of days following the delivery of the data package from Paragon related to the results of the Research Program (an “Option Period”). There is no payment due upon exercise of an Option pursuant to the Paragon Option Agreement. Activities under a Research Plan may continue past the exercise of an Option or entry into a License Agreement. We have exercised our Option with respect to DMR-001 and are negotiating the related License Agreement, but our Options with respect to DMR-002 and DMR-003 currently remain unexercised.

Upon exercise of an Option with respect to a Research Program, the parties are obligated to use reasonable efforts to finalize and execute a License Agreement within 90 days. Under the terms of a License Agreement, we expect that we will have sole authority over and control of the development, regulatory approval, manufacturing and commercialization of such in-licensed intellectual property worldwide. In addition, we expect to have sole authority over and control of the application for and issuance of all regulatory approvals related to such in-licensed intellectual property. Prior to entry into a License Agreement, Paragon is responsible for the prosecution, defense, maintenance and enforcement of patents related to the Research Program. Following entry into a License Agreement, we expect to control prosecution, defense, maintenance and enforcement of patents in-licensed under such License Agreement. However, there is no assurance that we will successfully negotiate future License Agreements with Paragon or that the terms will not differ from those described in this prospectus.

Unless terminated earlier, the Paragon Option Agreement shall continue in force on a Research Program-by-Research Program basis until the later of: (i) the end of the Option Period for such Research Program, as applicable, if such Option is not exercised by us; (ii) if we exercise our Option with respect to a Research Program, but the parties are unable to finalize and execute a License Agreement within 90 days, the expiration of such 90-day period (subject to any mutually agreed extension of such period); and (iii) the expiration of the applicable Research Term (as defined under the applicable Paragon Option Agreement). We may terminate any Paragon Option Agreement or any Research Program at any time for any or no reason upon

30 days’ prior written notice to Paragon; provided, that we must pay certain unpaid fees due to Paragon upon such termination, as well as any non-cancellable obligations reasonably incurred by Paragon in connection with its activities under any terminated Research Program. Paragon may terminate any Paragon Option Agreement or any Research Program immediately upon written notice to us if, as a result of any action or failure to act by us or our affiliates, such Research Program or all material activities under the applicable Research Plan are suspended, discontinued or otherwise delayed for a period of four consecutive months. Each party has the right to terminate the Paragon Option Agreement or any Research Program upon (i) 30 days’ prior written notice of the other party’s material breach that remains uncured for the 30-day period and (ii) the other party’s bankruptcy.

Upon signing of the Paragon Option Agreement, Damora became obligated to reimburse Paragon $10.6 million for research and development costs related to DMR-001, DMR-002, and DMR-003, other general and administrative costs incurred by Paragon though September 30, 2025, and certain additional development costs incurred between October 1, 2025 and October 7, 2025 (the “Pre-Development Costs”). The Pre-Development Costs reflect the actual historical costs incurred by Paragon, including a 20% mark-up on certain direct costs to approximate the indirect costs incurred by Paragon from inception of the programs to the entry into the Paragon Option Agreement. Such direct costs incurred by Paragon were related to development activities. Paragon’s cash flows related to DMR-001, DMR-002, and DMR-003 are operating cash flows.

We are also required to pay Paragon for certain development fees and costs on a Research Program-by-Research Program basis. Under the Paragon Option Agreement, we are required to pay Paragon a one-time, non-refundable research initiation fee within 30 days following finalization of a Research Plan in the amount of $1.25 million for each of DMR-001, DMR-002, and DMR-003. The Research Plans for each of DMR-001, DMR-002, and DMR-003 were completed in December 2025, and we expect to pay the related fees in January 2026. Under the Paragon Option Agreement, on a Research Program-by-Research Program basis, we are required to make one-time non-refundable milestone payments to Paragon of up to a total of $22.0 million for each of DMR-001, DMR-002, and DMR-003 upon the achievement of certain clinical development and regulatory milestones. We recognized research and development expense of $1.5 million related to the milestone payment due to Paragon in connection with the achievement of a development candidate for DMR-001 in December 2025. As of the date of this prospectus, we have not paid Paragon the DMR-001 development candidate milestone payment.

Upon exercise of the Option with respect to a Research Program, the parties are obligated to use reasonable efforts to finalize and execute a License Agreement within 30 days. Any License Agreement entered into with respect to a given Research Program shall contain the same milestone payment obligations as the applicable Paragon Option Agreement, provided that any milestone set in such Paragon Option Agreement that has not yet been achieved and is duplicated in such License Agreement shall no longer be achievable and payable under the terms of such Paragon Option Agreement and shall only be achievable under the terms of the License Agreement. For the avoidance of doubt, if a milestone is achieved and paid by us pursuant to a Paragon Option Agreement for a certain Research Program, then there shall be no milestone payment due for the achievement of such milestone under a subsequently executed License Agreement for such Research Program. Further, under a License Agreement, we would also be required to make royalty payments to Paragon in the low single-digit percentage range based on net sales of products, subject to certain reductions. The royalty term will terminate on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis upon the later of the expiration of the last-to-expire valid claim within the relevant patent rights or the twelfth anniversary of the first commercial sale of such product in such country.

Additionally, as part of the Paragon Option Agreement, on each of December 31, 2025 and December 31, 2026, we will grant Paramora warrants to purchase a number of shares equal to 1.00% of our outstanding capital stock as of the date of the grant on a fully-diluted basis, with an exercise price equal to the fair market value of the underlying shares of our Common Stock on each respective grant date. If the Research Term with respect to all Research Programs ends prior to the end of a calendar year, the warrant grant for such calendar year shall be pro-rated.

As of the closing of the Asset Acquisition, Damora had incurred total expenses of $15.2 million under the Paragon Option Agreement since its inception. No payments were made by Damora to Paragon prior to the closing of the Asset Acquisition. Through November 30, 2025, we have recognized $16.4 million of expense pursuant to the Paragon Option Agreement, of which $15.6 million is research and development expense and $0.8 million is general and administrative expense. Of the research and development expense, $5.1 million related to DMR-001, $1.5 million related to DMR-002, $1.3 million related to DMR-003, and $7.7 million was for shared program costs supporting all three programs. As of the date of this prospectus, we have paid Paragon an aggregate of $10.6 million, including $2.5 million related to DMR-001, $0.7 million related to DMR-002, $0.7 million related to DMR-003, and $6.7 million related to shared program costs supporting all three programs.

Intellectual Property

Overview

We strive to protect the proprietary programs and technologies that we believe are important to our business, including seeking and maintaining patent protection intended to cover the composition of matter of our programs, our methods of use and manufacture, and other inventions.

Paragon has filed provisional patent applications directed to antibodies that bind to mutCALR, including applications covering composition of matter, pharmaceutical formulations, and methods of using such antibodies. A provisional patent application is an application filed in the USPTO for the purpose of securing an early date of priority for the applicant’s invention. The provisional application must include a written description of what the inventor has discovered, along with a drawing of the invention, but need not include patent claims, statements concerning or disclosing the prior art, or certain other formalities. A provisional patent application allows for an effective filing date to be established with regard to an invention, but once a provisional patent application is filed, either a corresponding non-provisional patent application or a petition to convert the provisional patent application into a non-provisional patent application must be filed within 12 months or such effective filing date will be lost.

The maximum term of a U.S. patent, excluding extensions and adjustments, begins on the effective filing date of the first non-provisional application claiming the patented invention and ending 20 years from that date. In essence, a provisional patent application provides a patent applicant two principal advantages over filing a non-provisional application. First, it allows the applicant to secure an earlier priority date for its invention than that of an equivalent non-provisional application—up to one year earlier than the filing date of a related non-provisional application. Second, since the term of a patent runs from the effective filing date of the first non-provisional application but does not begin upon filing a provisional application, filing a provisional application provides the applicant an additional year’s time to refine that invention before filing a related non-provisional application without surrendering the earlier priority date. Securing an earlier priority date both ensures that later inventors cannot obtain a patent to the same invention and provides protection against certain arguments that developments in the field arising after the priority date should prevent or invalidate the applicant’s invention.

If the non-provisional patent applications filed for DMR-001 result in issued patents, such patents are expected to expire in 2046, without taking potential patent term adjustment or patent term extension into consideration. If we or Paragon timely file non-provisional patent applications in the United States and in countries outside of the United States with regard to Paragon’s DMR-002-related provisional patent applications and these non-provisional patent applications result in issued patents, such patents are expected to expire in 2046, without taking potential patent term adjustment or patent term extension into consideration.

In addition, as part of the agreement with Bridge Medicines, we assumed an in-license from Rockefeller University of a patent portfolio directed to a series of selective inhibitors of ENL/AF9 YEATS. As of December 1, 2025, the in-licensed portfolio includes 18 pending U.S. and foreign applications and one allowed Chinese application, covering compositions of matter for various N-linked compounds and methods of treatment using such compositions. If the in-licensed applications were to issue as one or more patents, these patents would expire in 2040. We also own two additional patent families relating to claims covering compositions of matter for various C-linked inhibitors of ENL/AF9 YEATS and various inhibitors of ENL/AF9 YEATS and FLT3, combinations with various therapeutic agents, methods of treatment, and methods of administration. As of December 1, 2025, these two families collectively include two pending U.S. patent applications and multiple pending foreign counterpart patent applications. If the applications were to issue as one or more patents, these patents would expire in 2042. We currently, and expect that we will continue to, file for patents in the United States with counterparts in major market countries in Europe and other key markets in the rest of the world.

Other IP Rights

In addition to patents, we rely upon unpatented trade secrets, know-how and continuing technological innovation to develop and maintain our competitive position. However, trade secrets and know-how can be difficult to protect. We seek to protect our proprietary information, in part by executing confidentiality agreements with our collaborators and scientific advisors, and non-competition, non-solicitation, confidentiality and invention assignment agreements with our employees and consultants. We have also executed agreements requiring assignment of inventions with selected scientific advisors and collaborators. The confidentiality agreements we enter into are designed to protect our proprietary information and the agreements or clauses requiring assignment of inventions to us are designed to grant us ownership of technologies that are developed through our relationship with the respective counterparty. We cannot guarantee, however, that we have executed such agreements with all applicable counterparties, that such agreements will not be breached, or that these agreements will afford us adequate protection of our intellectual property and proprietary rights. For more information, please see the section titled “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property” in this prospectus.

Commercial

Should any of our product candidates be approved for commercialization, we intend to develop a plan to commercialize them in the United States and other key markets, through internal infrastructure and/or external partnerships in a manner that will enable us to realize the full commercial value of our programs. Given our stage of development, we have not yet established a commercial organization or distribution capabilities.

Manufacturing

We do not own or operate, and currently have no plans to establish, any manufacturing facilities. All of our preclinical and clinical drug supply development, manufacturing, storage, distribution and testing are outsourced to third-party manufacturers and facilities. Our manufacturing strategy enables us to more efficiently direct financial resources to the research, development and commercialization of programs rather than diverting resources to internally develop and maintain manufacturing facilities. As our programs advance through development, we expect to enter into longer-term commercial supply agreements with key suppliers and manufacturers to fulfill and secure our supply needs.

Competition

We expect to face intense competition from other biopharmaceutical companies that are developing agents for the treatment of mutCALR-driven MPNs, including ET and MF. If approved for the treatment of patients with mutCALR-driven MPNs, our portfolio of products would compete with hydroxyurea, which is not approved for

the treatment of ET in the United States, anagrelide, ruxolitinib, and interferon, which has not been approved for ET, and well as ruxolitnib, momelotinib, pacritinib and fedratinib in MF.

We are aware of several companies with product candidates in development for the treatment of patients with mutCALR-driven MPNs, including Incyte’s INCA033989 and INCA035784, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc.’s JNJ-88549968, Meiji Seika Pharma’s mutCALR TCE, Prelude Therapeutics, LLC’s mCALR CDK9d DAC, Alethio Therapeutics’ AT-02, PharmaEssentia Corporation’s ropeginterferon alfa-2b, Merck & Co., Inc’s bomedemstat, Novartis AG’s pelabresib, Geron Corporation’s imetelstat, and Kartos Therapeutics, Inc.’s navtemadlin.

In addition, there are a number of large biotechnology and biopharmaceutical companies that are currently pursuing the development of products for the treatment of the biological processes that drive certain cancers. Companies that we are aware of targeting the treatment of AML include large companies with significant financial resources, such as Kyowa Kirin Co., Ltd., Syndax Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Crescent Biopharma, Inc. and Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Government Regulation

The FDA and other regulatory authorities at federal, state and local levels, as well as in foreign countries, extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, import, export, safety, effectiveness, labeling, packaging, storage, distribution, record keeping, approval, advertising, promotion, marketing, post-approval monitoring and post-approval reporting of biologics such as those we are developing. We, along with our third-party contractors, will be required to navigate the various preclinical, clinical and commercial approval requirements of the governing regulatory authorities of the countries in which we conduct studies or seek approval or licensure of our product candidates. Generally, before a new therapeutic product can be marketed, considerable data demonstrating a biological product candidate’s quality, safety, purity and potency, must be obtained, organized into a format specific for each regulatory authority, submitted for review and approved by the regulatory authority. For biological product candidates, potency is similar to efficacy and is interpreted to mean the specific ability or capacity of the product, as indicated by appropriate laboratory tests or by adequately controlled clinical data obtained through the administration of the product in the manner intended, to effect a given result.

U.S. Biologics Regulation

In the United States, biological products (or “biologics”) are subject to regulation under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”), the Public Health Service Act (“PHSA”) and other federal, state, local, and foreign statutes and regulations. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, and local 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 product development process, approval process or following approval may subject an applicant to administrative action and judicial sanctions. The process required by the FDA before biologic product candidates may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:

•

completion of preclinical laboratory tests and animal studies performed in accordance with the FDA’s current Good Laboratory Practices (“GLP”) regulations;

•

submission to the FDA of an IND, which must become effective before clinical trials may begin and must be updated annually or when significant changes are made;

•

approval by an independent institutional review board (“IRB”), or ethics committee at each clinical site before the trial is commenced;

•

manufacture of the proposed biologic candidate in accordance with current good manufacturing practices (“cGMPs”);

•

performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials in accordance with good clinical practice (“GCP”) requirements to establish the safety, purity and potency of the proposed biologic product candidate for its intended purpose;

•

preparation of and submission to the FDA of a biologics license application (“BLA”), after completion of all pivotal clinical trials;

•

a determination by the FDA within 60 days of its receipt of a BLA to file the application for review;

•

satisfactory completion of an FDA Advisory Committee review, if applicable;

•

satisfactory completion of an FDA pre-approval inspection of the manufacturing facility or facilities at which the proposed product is produced to assess compliance with cGMPs, and to assure that the facilities, methods and controls are adequate to preserve the biological product’s continued safety, purity and potency, and of selected clinical investigation sites to assess compliance with GCPs; and

•

FDA review and approval of a BLA to permit commercial marketing of the product for particular indications for use in the United States.

Preclinical and Clinical Development

Prior to beginning any clinical trial with a product candidate in the United States, we must submit an IND to the FDA. An IND is a request for authorization from the FDA to administer an investigational new drug product to humans. The central focus of an IND submission is on the general investigational plan and the protocol or protocols for preclinical studies and clinical trials. The IND also includes results of animal and in vitro studies assessing the toxicology, pharmacokinetics, pharmacology and pharmacodynamic characteristics of the product, chemistry, manufacturing and controls information, and any available human data or literature to support the use of the investigational product. An IND must become effective before human clinical trials may begin. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA, within the 30-day period, raises safety concerns or questions about the proposed clinical trial. In such a case, the IND may be placed on partial or full clinical hold and the IND sponsor, and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns or questions before the clinical trial can begin. Submission of an IND therefore may or may not result in FDA authorization to begin a clinical trial.

Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational product to human subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators in accordance with GCPs, which include the requirement that all research subjects provide their informed consent 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 separate submission to the existing IND must be made for each successive clinical trial conducted during product development and for any subsequent protocol amendments. Furthermore, an independent IRB representing each site proposing to conduct the clinical trial must review and approve the plan for any clinical trial and its informed consent form before the clinical trial begins at that site, and must monitor the trial until completed. Regulatory authorities, the IRB or the sponsor may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the subjects are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk or that the trial is unlikely to meet its stated objectives. Some studies also include oversight by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the clinical trial sponsor, known as a data safety monitoring board, which provides authorization for whether or not a trial may move forward at designated check points based on access to certain data from the trial and may halt the clinical trial if it determines that there is an unacceptable safety risk for subjects or other grounds, such as no demonstration of efficacy. There are also requirements governing the reporting of ongoing preclinical studies and clinical trials and clinical trial results to public registries.

For purposes of BLA approval, human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap.

•

Phase 1. The investigational product is initially introduced into healthy human subjects or patients with the target disease or condition. These studies are designed to test the safety, dosage tolerance, absorption, metabolism and distribution of the investigational product in humans, the side effects associated with increasing doses, and, if possible, to gain early evidence on effectiveness.

•

Phase 2. The investigational product is administered to a limited patient population with a specified disease or condition to evaluate the preliminary efficacy, optimal dosages and dosing schedule and to identify possible adverse side effects and safety risks. Multiple Phase 2 clinical trials may be conducted to obtain information prior to beginning larger and more expensive Phase 3 clinical trials.

•

Phase 3. The investigational product is administered to an expanded patient population to further evaluate dosage, to provide statistically significant evidence of clinical efficacy and to further test for safety, generally at multiple geographically dispersed clinical trial sites. These clinical trials are intended to establish the overall risk/benefit ratio of the investigational product and to provide an adequate basis for product approval.

In some cases, the FDA may require, or companies may voluntarily pursue, additional clinical trials after a product is approved to gain more information about the product. These so-called Phase 4 studies may be made a condition to approval of the BLA. Concurrent with clinical trials, companies may complete additional animal studies and develop additional information about the biological characteristics of the product candidate, and must finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and, among other things, must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the final product, or for biologics, the safety, purity and potency. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested, and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life.

A sponsor may choose, but is not required, to conduct a foreign clinical trial under an IND. When a foreign clinical trial is conducted under an IND, all IND requirements must be met unless waived. When the foreign clinical trial is not conducted under an IND, the sponsor must ensure that the trial complies with certain FDA regulatory requirements in order to use the trial as support for an IND or application for marketing approval or licensure, including that the trial was conducted in accordance with GCP, including review and approval by an independent ethics committee and use of proper procedures for obtaining informed consent from subjects, and the FDA is able to validate the data from the trial through an onsite inspection if the FDA deems such inspection necessary. The GCP requirements encompass both ethical and data integrity standards for clinical studies.

BLA Submission and Review

Assuming successful completion of all required testing in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements, the results of product development, nonclinical studies and clinical trials are submitted to the FDA as part of a BLA requesting approval to market the product for one or more indications. The BLA must include all relevant data available from pertinent preclinical studies and clinical trials, including negative or ambiguous results as well as positive findings, together with detailed information relating to the product’s chemistry, manufacturing, controls, and proposed labeling, among other things. Data can come from company-sponsored clinical studies intended to test the safety and effectiveness of the product, or from a number of alternative sources, including studies initiated and sponsored by investigators. The submission of a BLA requires payment of a substantial application user fee to the FDA, unless a waiver or exemption applies.

Within 60 days following submission of the application, the FDA reviews a BLA submitted to determine if it is substantially complete before the agency accepts it for filing. The FDA may refuse to file any BLA that it deems

incomplete or not properly reviewable at the time of submission and may request additional information. In this event, the BLA must be resubmitted with the additional information. Once a BLA has been accepted for filing, the FDA’s goal is to review standard applications within 10 months after the filing date, or, if the application qualifies for priority review, six months after the FDA accepts the application for filing. In both standard and priority reviews, the review process may also be extended by FDA requests for additional information or clarification. The FDA reviews a BLA to determine, among other things, whether a product is safe, pure and potent and the facility in which it is manufactured, processed, packed or held meets standards designed to assure the product’s continued safety, purity and potency. The FDA may convene an advisory committee to provide clinical insight on application review questions. The FDA is not bound by the recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations carefully when making decisions.

Before approving a BLA, the FDA will typically 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 adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. Additionally, before approving a BLA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCPs. If the FDA determines that the application, manufacturing process or manufacturing facilities are not acceptable, it will outline the deficiencies in the submission and often will request additional testing or information. Notwithstanding the submission of any requested additional information, the FDA ultimately may decide that the application does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval.

After the FDA evaluates a BLA and conducts inspections of manufacturing facilities where the investigational product and/or its drug substance will be produced, the FDA may issue an approval letter or a Complete Response letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the product with specific prescribing information for specific indications. A Complete Response letter will describe all of the deficiencies that the FDA has identified in the BLA, except that where the FDA determines that the data supporting the application are inadequate to support approval, the FDA may issue the Complete Response letter without first conducting required inspections, testing submitted product lots and/or reviewing proposed labeling. In issuing the Complete Response letter, the FDA may recommend actions that the applicant might take to place the BLA in condition for approval, including requests for additional information or clarification. The FDA may delay or refuse approval of a BLA if applicable regulatory criteria are not satisfied, require additional testing or information and/or require post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor safety or efficacy of a product.

If regulatory approval of a product is granted, such approval will be granted for particular indications and may entail limitations on the indicated uses for which such product may be marketed. For example, the FDA may approve the BLA with a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (“REMS”) to ensure the benefits of the product outweigh its risks. A REMS is a safety strategy to manage a known or potential serious risk associated with a product and to enable patients to have continued access to such medicines by managing their safe use, and could include medication guides, physician communication plans, or elements to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. The FDA also may condition approval on, among other things, changes to proposed labeling or the development of adequate controls and specifications. Once approved, the FDA may withdraw the product approval if compliance with pre- and post-marketing requirements is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the marketplace. The FDA may require one or more Phase 4 post-market studies and surveillance to further assess and monitor the product’s safety and effectiveness after commercialization, and may limit further marketing of the product based on the results of these post-marketing studies.

Post-Approval Requirements

Any products manufactured or distributed by us pursuant to FDA approvals are subject to pervasive and continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, requirements relating to record-keeping,

reporting of adverse experiences, periodic reporting, product sampling and distribution, and advertising and promotion of the product. As part of the manufacturing process, the manufacturer is required to perform certain tests on each lot of the product before it is released for distribution. After a BLA is approved for a biological product, the product also may be subject to official lot release. If the product is subject to official release by the FDA, the manufacturer submits samples of each lot of product to the FDA together with a release protocol showing a summary of the history of manufacture of the lot and the results of all of the manufacturer’s tests performed on the lot. The FDA also may perform certain confirmatory tests on lots of some products before releasing the lots for distribution by the manufacturer. In addition, the FDA conducts laboratory research related to the regulatory standards on the safety, purity, and potency or effectiveness of biologics. After approval, most changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications or other labeling claims, are subject to prior FDA review and approval. There also are continuing user fee requirements, under which the FDA assesses an annual program fee for each product identified in an approved BLA. Biologic manufacturers and their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state authorities, and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state authorities for compliance with cGMPs, which impose certain procedural and documentation requirements upon us and our third-party manufacturers. Changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated, and, depending on the significance of the change, may require prior FDA approval before being implemented. FDA regulations also require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMPs and impose reporting requirements upon us and any third-party manufacturers that we may decide to use. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain compliance with cGMPs and other aspects of regulatory compliance.

The FDA may withdraw 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 adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in revisions to the approved labeling to add new safety information; imposition of post-market studies or clinical studies to assess new safety risks; or imposition of distribution restrictions or other restrictions under a REMS program. Other potential consequences include, among other things:

•

restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of a product, complete withdrawal of the product from the market or product recalls;

•

fines, warning letters or holds on post-approval clinical studies;

•

refusal of the FDA to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications, or suspension or revocation of existing product approvals;

•

product seizure or detention, or refusal of the FDA to permit the import or export of products;

•

consent decrees, corporate integrity agreements, debarment or exclusion from federal healthcare programs;

•

mandated modification of promotional materials and labeling and the issuance of corrective information;

•

the issuance of safety alerts, Dear Healthcare Provider letters, press releases and other communications containing warnings or other safety information about the product; or

•

injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.

The FDA closely regulates the marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of biologics. A company can make only those claims relating to safety and efficacy, purity and potency that are approved by the FDA and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. The FDA and other governmental regulatory authorities

actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses. Failure to comply with these requirements can result in, among other things, adverse publicity, warning letters, corrective advertising and potential civil and criminal penalties. Physicians may prescribe legally available products for uses that are not described in the product’s labeling and that differ from those tested by us and approved by the FDA. Such off-label uses are common across medical specialties. Physicians may believe that such off-label uses are the best treatment for many patients in varied circumstances. The FDA does not regulate the behavior of physicians in their choice of treatments. The FDA does, however, restrict manufacturer’s communications on the subject of off-label use of their products.

Biosimilars and Reference Product Exclusivity

The BPCIA created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are highly similar, or “biosimilar,” to or interchangeable with an FDA-approved reference biological product. The FDA has issued several guidance documents outlining an approach to review and approval of biosimilars.

Biosimilarity, which requires that there be no clinically meaningful differences between the biological product and the reference product in terms of safety, purity, and potency, is generally shown through analytical studies, animal studies, and a clinical trial or trials. Interchangeability requires that a product is biosimilar to the reference product and the product must demonstrate that it can be expected to produce the same clinical results as the reference product in any given patient and, for products that are administered multiple times to an individual, the biologic and the reference biologic may be alternated or switched after one has been previously administered without increasing safety risks or risks of diminished efficacy relative to exclusive use of the reference biologic. A product shown to be biosimilar or interchangeable with an FDA-approved reference biological product may rely in part on the FDA’s previous determination of safety and effectiveness for the reference product for approval, which can potentially reduce the cost and time required to obtain approval to market the product. Complexities associated with the larger, and often more complex, structures of biological products, as well as the processes by which such products are manufactured, pose significant hurdles to implementation of the abbreviated approval pathway that are still being worked out by the FDA. The FDA has issued two guidance documents intended to inform prospective applicants and facilitate the development of proposed biosimilars and interchangeable biosimilars, as well as to describe the FDA’s interpretation of certain statutory requirements added by the BPCIA.

Under the BPCIA, an application for a biosimilar product may not be submitted to the FDA until four years following the date that the reference product was first licensed by the FDA. In addition, the approval of a biosimilar product may not be made effective by the FDA until 12 years from the date on which the reference product was first licensed. During this 12-year period of exclusivity, another company may still market a competing version of the reference product if the FDA approves a full BLA for the competing product containing that applicant’s own preclinical data and data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of its product. The BPCIA also created certain exclusivity periods for biosimilars approved as interchangeable products. At this juncture, it is unclear whether products deemed “interchangeable” by the FDA will, in fact, be readily substituted by pharmacies, which are governed by state pharmacy law.

A reference biologic is granted 12 years of exclusivity from the time of first licensure of the reference product. The first biologic product submitted under the abbreviated approval pathway that is determined to be interchangeable with the reference product has exclusivity against other biologics submitted under the abbreviated approval pathway for the lesser of (i) one year after the first commercial marketing, (ii) 18 months after approval if there is no legal challenge, (iii) 18 months after the resolution in the applicant’s favor of a lawsuit challenging the biologics’ patents if an application has been submitted, or (iv) 42 months after the application has been approved if a lawsuit is ongoing within the 42-month period.

A biological product can also obtain pediatric market exclusivity in the United States. Pediatric exclusivity, if granted, adds six months to existing exclusivity periods and patent terms. This six-month exclusivity, which runs from the end of other exclusivity protection or patent term, may be granted based on the voluntary completion of a pediatric study in accordance with an FDA-issued “Written Request” for such a study.

The BPCIA is complex and continues to be interpreted and implemented by the FDA. In July 2018, the FDA announced an action plan to encourage the development and efficient review of biosimilars, including the establishment of a new office within the agency that will focus on therapeutic biologics and biosimilars. On December 20, 2020, Congress amended the PHSA as part of the COVID-19 relief bill to further simplify the biosimilar review process by making it optional to show that conditions of use proposed in labeling have been previously approved for the reference product, which used to be a requirement of the application. In addition, government proposals have sought to reduce the 12-year reference product exclusivity period. Other aspects of the BPCIA, some of which may impact the BPCIA exclusivity provisions, have also been the subject of recent litigation. As a result, the ultimate impact, implementation, and impact of the BPCIA is subject to significant uncertainty.

As discussed below, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (“IRA”) is a significant law that intends to foster generic and biosimilar competition and to lower drug and biologic costs.

Patent Term Extension

In the United States, after a BLA is approved, owners of relevant drug patents may apply for up to a five-year patent extension, which permits patent term restoration as compensation for the patent term lost during the FDA regulatory process. The allowable patent term extension is typically calculated as one-half the time between (1) the later of (a) the effective date of an IND and (b) issue date of the patent for which extension is sought, and (2) the submission date of a BLA, plus the time between BLA submission date and the BLA approval date, up to a maximum of five years. The time can be shortened if the FDA determines that the applicant did not pursue licensure with due diligence. The total patent term after the extension may not exceed 14 years from the date of product licensure. Only one patent applicable to a licensed biological product is eligible for extension and only those claims covering the product, a method for using it, or a method for manufacturing it may be extended, and the application for the extension must be submitted prior to the expiration of the patent in question. However, we may not be granted an extension because of, for example, failing to exercise due diligence during the testing phase or regulatory review process, failing to apply within applicable deadlines, failing to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise failing to satisfy applicable requirements. Some, but not all, foreign jurisdictions possess patent term extension or other additional patent exclusivity mechanisms that may be more or less stringent and comprehensive than those of the United States.

Other Healthcare Laws and Compliance Requirements

Pharmaceutical companies are subject to additional healthcare regulation and enforcement by the federal government and by authorities in the states and foreign jurisdictions in which they conduct their business that may restrict certain general business and marketing practices. Such laws include, without limitation: the federal Anti-Kickback Statute (“AKS”); the federal False Claims Act (“FCA”); the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”) and similar foreign, federal and state fraud, abuse and transparency laws.

The AKS prohibits, among other things, persons and entities from knowingly and willfully soliciting, receiving, offering or paying remuneration, to induce, or in return for, either the referral of an individual, or the purchase or recommendation of an item or service for which payment may be made under any federal healthcare program. The term remuneration has been interpreted broadly to include anything of value. The AKS has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on one hand, and prescribers and purchasers on

the other. The government often takes the position that to violate the AKS, only one purpose of the remuneration need be to induce referrals, even if there are other legitimate purposes for the remuneration. There are a number of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting some common activities from AKS prosecution, but they are drawn narrowly and practices that involve remuneration, such as consulting agreements, that may be alleged to be intended to induce prescribing, purchasing or recommending may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exception or safe harbor. Our practices may not in all cases meet all of the criteria for protection under a statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor. Failure to meet all of the requirements of a particular applicable statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor does not make the conduct per se illegal under the AKS. Instead, the legality of the arrangement will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis based on a cumulative review of all of its facts and circumstances. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. In 2025, the Department of Justice continued to apply the Supreme Court’s 2023 scienter framework in United States ex rel. Schutte v. SuperValu Inc. for FCA matters, focusing on a defendant’s subjective understanding and beliefs at the time of claim submission, thus expanding the use of the FCA against recipients of federal funds that allegedly misrepresented compliance with federal civil rights laws.

Civil and criminal false claims laws, including the FCA, and civil monetary penalty laws, which can be enforced through civil whistleblower or qui tam actions, prohibit, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, claims for payment of federal government funds, including in federal healthcare programs, that are false or fraudulent. Pharmaceutical and other healthcare companies have been prosecuted under these laws for engaging in a variety of different types of conduct that caused the submission of false claims to federal healthcare programs. Under the AKS, for example, a claim resulting from a violation of the AKS is deemed to be a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the FCA.

HIPAA created additional federal criminal statutes that prohibit, among other things, executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, including private third-party payors, and making false statements relating to healthcare matters. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the healthcare fraud statute implemented under HIPAA or specific intent to violate the statute in order to have committed a violation.

The FDCA addresses, among other things, the design, production, labeling, promotion, manufacturing, and testing of drugs, biologics and medical devices, and prohibits such acts as the introduction into interstate commerce of adulterated or misbranded drugs or devices. The PHSA also prohibits the introduction into interstate commerce of unlicensed or mislabeled biological products.

The U.S. 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 annually report to the Centers for Medicaid & Medicare Services (“CMS”) information related to payments or other transfers of value to various healthcare professionals including physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, certified nurse anesthetists, certified nurse-midwives, and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. Beginning on January 1, 2023, California Assembly Bill 1278 requires California physicians and surgeons to notify patients of the Open Payments database established under the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act. In 2025, CMS continued incremental Open Payments program updates, published updates to data publication timelines, and expanded taxonomy lists for covered recipients, which may increase reporting and validation burdens for manufacturers and expand public transparency regarding transfers of value.

We are also subject to additional similar U.S. state and foreign law equivalents of each of the above federal laws, which, in some cases, differ from each other in significant ways, and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of such laws or any other

governmental regulations that apply, we may be subject to penalties, including, without limitation, civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from government-funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid or similar programs in other countries or jurisdictions, integrity oversight and reporting obligations to resolve allegations of non-compliance, disgorgement, individual imprisonment, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations.

Data Privacy and Security

Numerous state, federal, and foreign laws govern the collection, dissemination, use, access to, confidentiality, and security of personal information, including health-related information. In the United States, numerous federal and state laws and regulations, including state data breach notification laws, state health information privacy laws, and federal and state consumer protection laws and regulations, govern the collection, use, disclosure, and protection of health-related and other personal information could apply to our operations or the operations of our partners. For example, HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (“HITECH”), and their respective implementing regulations imposes privacy, security, and breach notification obligations on certain health care providers, health plans, and health care clearinghouses, known as covered entities, as well as their business associates and their covered subcontractors that perform certain services that involve using, disclosing, creating, receiving, maintaining, or transmitting individually identifiable protected health information for or on behalf of such covered entities. These requirements imposed by HIPAA and the HITECH Act on covered entities and business associates include entering into agreements that require business associates protect PHI provided by the covered entity against improper use or disclosure, among other things; following certain standards for the privacy of PHI, which limit the disclosure of a patient’s past, present, or future physical or mental health or condition or information about a patient’s receipt of health care if the information identifies, or could reasonably be used to identify, the individual; ensuring the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of all PHI created, received, maintained, or transmitted in electronic form, to identify and protect against reasonably anticipated threats or impermissible uses or disclosures to the security and integrity of such PHI; and reporting of breaches of PHI to individuals and regulators.

Entities that are found to be in violation of HIPAA may be subject to significant civil, criminal, and administrative fines and penalties and/or additional reporting and oversight obligations if required to enter into a resolution agreement and corrective action plan with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) to settle allegations of HIPAA non-compliance. A covered entity or business associate is also liable for civil money penalties for a violation that is based on an act or omission of any of its agents, which may include a downstream business associate, as determined according to the federal common law of agency. HITECH also increased the civil and criminal penalties applicable to covered entities and business associates and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce HIPAA and seek attorneys’ fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. To the extent that we submit electronic healthcare claims and payment transactions that do not comply with the electronic data transmission standards established under HIPAA and HITECH, payments to us may be delayed or denied. In addition, state health information privacy laws, such as California’s Confidentiality of Medical Information Act and Washington’s My Health My Data Act, govern the privacy and security of health-related information, specifically, may apply even when HIPAA does not and impose additional requirements.

Even when HIPAA and state health information privacy laws do not apply, according to the FTC and state Attorneys General, violating consumers’ privacy rights or failing to take appropriate steps to keep consumers’ personal information secure may constitute unfair acts or practices in or affecting commerce in violation of Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act and state consumer protection laws.

In addition, certain state laws, such as the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (“CCPA”), govern the privacy and security of personal information,

including health-related information in certain circumstances, some of which are more stringent than HIPAA in various ways. Numerous other states have passed similar laws, but many differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts. The CCPA applies to personal data of consumers, business representatives, and employees, and imposes obligations on certain businesses that do business in California, including to provide specific disclosures in privacy notices and affords rights to California residents in relation to their personal information. Health information falls under the CCPA’s definition of personal information where it identifies, relates to, describes, or is reasonably capable of being associated with or could reasonably be linked, directly or indirectly, with a particular consumer or household unless it is subject to HIPAA and is included under a new category of personal information, “sensitive personal information,” which is offered greater protection.

The numerous other comprehensive privacy laws that have passed or are being considered in other states, as well as at the federal and local levels also exempt some data processed in the context of clinical trials; but others exempt covered entities and business associations subject to HIPAA altogether, further complicating compliance efforts, and increasing legal risk and compliance costs for us and the third parties upon whom we rely.

There are also an increasing number of, and continuous change within, foreign laws regulating data privacy and security, such as Canada’s Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, Australia’s Privacy Act 1988, New Zealand’s Privacy Act 2020 and South Korea’s Personal Information Protection Act. In particular, when we conduct clinical trials, including in New Zealand, we need to comply with the applicable country data privacy and security laws with respect to the processing of clinical data, which impose obligations similar to those described below in the section titled “— Other Government Regulation Outside of the United States — Regulation in the European Union — European Data Laws” of this prospectus. Privacy and security laws, regulations, and other obligations are constantly evolving, may conflict with each other to complicate compliance efforts, and can result in investigations, proceedings, or actions that lead to significant civil and/or criminal penalties and restrictions on data processing.

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 burden on us.

Coverage and Reimbursement

Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of any pharmaceutical or biological product for which we obtain regulatory approval. Sales of any product, if approved, depend, in part, on the extent to which such product will be covered by third-party payors, such as federal, state, and foreign government healthcare programs, commercial insurance and managed healthcare organizations, and the level of reimbursement, if any, for such product by third-party payors. Decisions regarding whether to cover any of our product candidates, if approved, the extent of coverage and amount of reimbursement to be provided are made on a plan-by-plan basis. Further, no uniform policy for coverage and reimbursement exists in the United States, and coverage and reimbursement can differ significantly from payor to payor. Third-party payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement rates, but also have their own methods and approval process apart from Medicare determinations. As a result, the coverage determination process is often a time-consuming and costly process that will require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our product candidates to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be applied consistently or obtained in the first instance.

Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the prices charged for medical products and services, examining the medical necessity and reviewing the cost effectiveness of pharmaceutical or biological products, medical devices and medical services, in addition to questioning safety and efficacy. Adoption of price controls and cost-containment measures, and adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and

measures, could further limit sales of any product that receives approval. Decreases in third-party reimbursement for any product or a decision by a third-party not to cover a product could reduce physician usage and patient demand for the product.

In addition, companion diagnostic tests require coverage and reimbursement separate and apart from the coverage and reimbursement for their companion pharmaceutical or biological products. Similar challenges to obtaining coverage and reimbursement, applicable to pharmaceutical or biological products, will apply to companion diagnostics.

In addition, the U.S. government, state legislatures and foreign governments have continued implementing cost-containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on coverage and reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products. The IRA provides CMS with significant new authorities intended to curb drug costs and to encourage market competition. For the first time, CMS will be able to directly negotiate prescription drug prices and to cap out-of-pocket costs. Each year, CMS will select and negotiate a preset number of high-spend drugs and biologics that are covered under Medicare Part B and Part D that do not have generic or biosimilar competition. On August 15, 2024, CMS announced the agreed-upon reimbursement prices of the first 10 drugs that were subject to price negotiations. In January 2025, CMS announced a list of 15 additional drugs Medicare Part D drugs that will be subject to price negotiations. The IRA also provides a new “inflation rebate” covering Medicare patients that took effect in 2023 and is intended to counter certain price increases in prescriptions drugs. The inflation rebate provision requires drug manufacturers to pay a rebate to the federal government if the price for a drug or biologic under Medicare Part B and Part D increases faster than the rate of inflation. To support biosimilar competition, beginning in October 2022, qualifying biosimilars may receive a Medicare Part B payment increase for a period of five years. Separately, if a biologic drug for which no biosimilar exists delays a biosimilar’s market entry beyond two years, CMS will be authorized to subject the biologics manufacturer to price negotiations intended to ensure fair competition. Notwithstanding these provisions, the IRA’s impact on commercialization and competition remains largely uncertain.

Healthcare Reform

The United States and some foreign jurisdictions are considering or have enacted a number of reform proposals to change the healthcare system. There is significant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare costs, improving quality or expanding access. In the United States, the pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by federal and state legislative initiatives, including those designed to limit the pricing, coverage, and reimbursement of pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical products, especially under government-funded health care programs, and increased governmental control of drug pricing.

For example, the ACA, which was enacted in March 2010, 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 contains a number of provisions of particular import to the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, including, but not limited to, those governing enrollment in federal healthcare programs, a new methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated for drugs that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted or injected, and annual fees based on pharmaceutical companies’ share of sales to federal health care programs. Since its enactment, there have been judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA, and we expect there will be additional challenges and amendments to the ACA in the future. For example, the IRA, 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 creating a new manufacturer discount program.

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted, including automatic aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers of on average 2% per fiscal year as part of the federal budget sequestration under the Budget Control Act of 2011. These reductions went into effect in April 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments, will remain in effect until 2032 unless additional action is taken by Congress. In addition, the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, among other things, amended the Medicare Act (as amended by the ACA) to increase the point-of-sale discounts that manufacturers must agree to offer under the Medicare Part D coverage discount program from 50% to 70% off negotiated prices of applicable brand drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period, as a condition for the manufacturer’s outpatient drugs being covered under Medicare Part D.

Moreover, there has recently been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state measures designed to, among other things, reduce the cost of prescription drugs, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. For example, in May 2019, CMS adopted a final rule allowing Medicare Advantage Plans the option to use step therapy for Part B drugs, permitting Medicare Part D plans to apply certain utilization controls to new starts of five of the six protected class drugs, and requiring the Explanation of Benefits for Part D beneficiaries to disclose drug price increases and lower cost therapeutic alternatives, which went into effect on January 1, 2021. 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.

Notwithstanding the IRA, continued legislative and enforcement interest exists in the United States with respect to specialty drug pricing practices. We expect regulators to continue pushing for transparency to drug pricing, reducing the cost of prescription drugs under Medicare, reviewing the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reforming government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs.

Other Government Regulation Outside of the United States

In addition to regulations in the United States, we are subject to a variety of regulations in other jurisdictions governing, among other things, research and development, clinical trials, testing, manufacturing, safety, efficacy, quality control, labeling, packaging, storage, record keeping, distribution, reporting, export and import, advertising, marketing and other promotional practices involving biological products as well as authorization, approval as well as post-approval monitoring and reporting of our products. Because biologically sourced raw materials are subject to unique contamination risks, their use may be restricted in some countries.

Whether or not we obtain FDA approval for a product, we must obtain the requisite approvals from regulatory authorities in foreign countries prior to the commencement of clinical trials or marketing of the product in those countries. Certain countries outside of the United States have a similar process that requires the submission of a clinical trial application much like the IND prior to the commencement of human clinical trials.

The requirements and process governing the conduct of clinical trials, including requirements to conduct additional clinical trials, product licensing, safety reporting, post-authorization requirements, marketing and

promotion, interactions with healthcare professionals, pricing and reimbursement may vary widely from country to country. No action can be taken to market any product in a country until an appropriate approval application has been approved by the regulatory authorities in that country. The current approval process varies from country to country, and the time spent in gaining approval varies from that required for FDA approval. In certain countries, the sales price of a product must also be approved. The pricing review period often begins after market approval is granted. Even if a product is approved by a regulatory authority, satisfactory prices may not be approved for such product, which would make launch of such products commercially unfeasible in such countries.

Regulation in the European Union

European Data Laws

The collection and use of personal health data and other personal data in the EU is governed by the provisions of the European General Data Protection Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (GDPR), which came into force in May 2018, and related data protection laws in individual member states of the EU (“EU Member States”). The GDPR imposes a number of strict obligations and restrictions on the ability to process, including collecting, analyzing and transferring, personal data of individuals, in particular with respect to health data from clinical trials and adverse event reporting. The GDPR includes requirements relating to the legal basis of the processing (such as consent of the individuals to whom the personal data relates), the information provided to the individuals prior to processing their personal data, the notification obligations to the national data protection authorities and data subjects, the measures to be taken when engaging processors, and the security and confidentiality of the personal data. EU Member States may also impose additional requirements in relation to health, genetic and biometric data through their national legislation.

In addition, the GDPR imposes specific restrictions on the transfer of personal data to countries outside of the EU and in Iceland, Norway and Liechtenstein (together the European Economic Area (“EEA”)) that are not considered by the European Commission (“EC”) to provide an adequate level of data protection. Appropriate safeguards are required to enable such transfers. Among the appropriate safeguards that can be used, the data exporter may use the standard contractual clauses (“SCCs”). When relying on SCCs, data exporters are also required to conduct a transfer risk assessment to verify if anything in the law and/or practices of the third country may impinge on the effectiveness of the SCCs in the context of the transfer at stake and, if so, to identify and adopt supplementary measures that are necessary to bring the level of protection of the data transferred to the EU standard of essential equivalence. Where no supplementary measure is suitable, the data exporter should avoid, suspend or terminate the transfer With regard to the transfer of data from the EEA to the United States, on July 10, 2023, the EC adopted its adequacy decision for the EU-US Data Privacy Framework. On the basis of the new adequacy decision, personal data can flow from the EEA to U.S. companies participating in the framework. With regard to the transfer of data from EU to the United Kingdom (“UK”), personal data may freely flow from the EEA to the UK since the UK is deemed to have an adequate data protection level. However, the adequacy decisions include a “sunset clause” which entails that the decisions will automatically expire four years after their entry into force, unless renewed.

Failure to comply with the requirements of the GDPR and the related national data protection laws of the EU Member States may result in significant monetary fines for noncompliance of up to €20 million or 4% of the annual global revenues of the noncompliant company, whichever is greater, other administrative penalties and a number of criminal offenses for organizations and, in certain cases, their directors and officers, as well as civil liability claims from individuals whose personal data was processed. Data protection authorities from the different EU Member States may still implement certain variations, enforce the GDPR and national data protection laws differently, and introduce additional national regulations and guidelines, which adds to the complexity of processing personal data in the EU.

Furthermore, are specific requirements relating to processing health data from clinical trials, including public disclosure obligations provided in the EU Clinical Trial Regulation No. 536/2014 (“CTR”), EMA disclosure initiatives and voluntary commitments by industry. Failure to comply with these obligations could lead to government enforcement actions and significant penalties against us, harm to our reputation, and adversely impact our business and operating results.

On February 11, 2025, the European Union adopted Regulation (EU) 2025/327 establishing the European Health Data Space, which imposes new obligations and liabilities on companies that handle electronic health data in the EU, including mandatory interoperability, logging, security and cross-border exchange requirements for electronic health record systems, expanded individual rights of access and control, and conditions and prohibitions on secondary uses of health data (e.g., for research or regulatory purposes), with staged implementation beginning in late 2025 and 2026. Compliance may require significant investments in technology, processes and governance, as well as engagement with national health data access bodies, and could limit companies’ ability to collect, process, transfer, or commercialize health data or delay product development and post-market activities. Failure to comply—or differing national implementations, enforcement actions or evolving guidance—could result in audits, restrictions, fines, litigation, reputational harm, interruption of operations and increased costs.

Additionally, following the UK’s withdrawal from the EU and the EEA, companies also have to comply with the UK’s data protection laws (including the UK GDPR (as defined in section 3(10) (as supplemented by section 205(4)) of the Data Protection Act 2018 (the DPA 2018)), the DPA 2018, and related data protection laws in the UK). Separate from the fines that can be imposed by the GDPR, the UK regime has the ability to fine up to the greater of £17.5 million or 4% of global turnover.

Companies are subject to specific transfer rules under the UK regime which broadly mirror the GDPR rules. On February 2, 2022, the UK Secretary of State laid before the UK Parliament the international data transfer agreement (“IDTA”) and the international data transfer addendum to the EC’s standard contractual clauses for international data transfers (the “IDTA Addendum”) and a document setting out transitional provisions. The IDTA and IDTA Addendum came into force on March 21, 2022 and replaced the old SCCs for the purposes of the UK regime.

With regard to the transfer of personal data from the UK to the United States, the UK government has adopted an adequacy decision for the United States (the “UK-US Data Bridge”), which came into force on October 12, 2023. The UK-US Data Bridge recognizes the United States as offering an adequate level of data protection where the transfer is to a U.S. company participating in the EU-US Data Privacy Framework and the UK Extension to the EU-US Data Privacy Framework.

Drug and Biologic Development Process

Regardless of where they are conducted, all clinical trials included in applications for marketing authorization (“MA”) for human medicines in the EU/EEA must have been carried out in accordance with EU regulations. This means that clinical trials conducted in the EU/EEA have to comply with EU clinical trial legislation but also that clinical trials conducted outside the EU/EEA have to comply with ethical principles equivalent to those set out in the EEA, including adhering to international good clinical practice and the Declaration of Helsinki. The conduct of clinical trials in the EU is governed by the CTR, which entered into force on January 31, 2022. The CTR replaced the Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC (“Clinical Trials Directive”) and introduced a complete overhaul of the existing regulation of clinical trials for medicinal products in the EU.

Under the former regime, which will expire after a transition period of three years, as outlined below in more detail, before a clinical trial can be initiated it must be approved in each EU member state where there is a site at

which the clinical trial is to be conducted. The approval must be obtained from two separate entities: the National Competent Authority (“NCA”) and one or more ethics committees. The NCA of the EU Member States in which the clinical trial will be conducted must authorize the conduct of the trial, and the independent ethics committee must grant a positive opinion in relation to the conduct of the clinical trial in the relevant EU member state before the commencement of the trial. Any substantial changes to the trial protocol or other information submitted with the clinical trial applications must be submitted to or approved by the relevant NCA and ethics committees. Under the current regime all suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions to the investigated drug that occur during the clinical trial must be reported to the NCA and to the ethics committees of the EU member state where they occur.

A more unified procedure will apply under the new CTR. A sponsor will be able to submit a single application for approval of a clinical trial through a centralized EU clinical trials portal (the “CTIS”). One national regulatory authority (the reporting EU member state proposed by the applicant) will take the lead in validating and evaluating the application and consult and coordinate with the other concerned EU Member States. If an application is rejected, it may be amended and resubmitted through the EU clinical trials portal. If an approval is issued, the sponsor may start the clinical trial in all concerned EU Member States. However, a concerned EU member state may in limited circumstances declare an “opt-out” from an approval and prevent the clinical trial from being conducted in such member state. The CTR also aims to streamline and simplify the rules on safety reporting and introduces enhanced transparency requirements such as mandatory submission of a summary of the clinical trial results to the EU Database. The CTR foresees a three-year transition period. EU Member States will work in CTIS immediately after the system has gone live. Since January 31, 2023, submission of initial clinical trial applications via CTIS is mandatory, and CTIS serves as the single entry point for submission of clinical trial-related information and data. By January 31, 2025, all ongoing trials approved under the former Clinical Trials Directive will need to comply with the CTR and have to be transitioned to CTIS. On July 19, 2023, the EC published guidance concerning the steps to be taken in this transition. This guidance provides, among other things, that (i) documentation which was previously assessed will not be reassessed, (ii) templates that were developed and endorsed by the EU Clinical Trials Expert Group to provide compliance with the CTR do not need to be updated and (iii) there is no need to retrospectively create a site suitability form, which are only necessary for new trial sites.

Under both the former regime and the new CTR, national laws, regulations, and the applicable GCP and GLP standards must also be respected during the conduct of the trials, including the International Council for Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use guidelines on GCP and the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki.

During the development of a medicinal product, the EMA and national regulators within the EU provide the opportunity for dialogue and guidance on the development program. At the EMA level, this is usually done in the form of scientific advice, which is given by the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (“CHMP”) on the recommendation of the Scientific Advice Working Party. A fee is incurred with each scientific advice procedure but is significantly reduced for designated orphan medicines. Advice from the EMA is typically provided based on questions concerning, for example, quality (chemistry, manufacturing and controls testing), nonclinical testing and clinical studies, and pharmacovigilance plans and risk-management programs. Advice is not legally binding with regard to any future Marketing Authorization Application (“MAA”) of the product concerned.

Drug Marketing Authorization

In the EEA, after completion of all required clinical testing, pharmaceutical products may only be placed on the market after obtaining a MA. To obtain an MA of a drug under European Union regulatory systems, an applicant can submit an MAA through, amongst others, a centralized or decentralized procedure.

To be used or sold in the UK, a drug must have an effective MA obtained by a centralized application through EMA or a national application. National applications are governed by the Human Medicines Regulations (SI 2012/1916). Applications are made electronically through the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (“MHRA”) Submissions Portal. The process from application to authorizations generally takes up to 210 days, excluding time taken to provide any additional information or data required by the MHRA.

On August 30, 2023, the MHRA published detailed guidance on its new International Reliance Procedure (“IRP”) for MAAs. The IRP applies since January 1, 2024 and replaces existing EU reliance procedures to apply for authorizations from seven international regulators (e.g., Health Canada, Swiss Medic, FDA, EMA, among others). The IRP allows medicinal products approved in other jurisdictions that meet certain criteria to undergo a fast-tracked MHRA review to obtain and/or update a MA in the UK. Applicants can submit initial MAAs to the IRP, but the procedure can also be used throughout the lifecycle of a product for post-authorization procedures including line extensions, variations and renewals.

Centralized Authorization Procedure

The centralized procedure provides for the grant of a single MA that is issued by the EC following the scientific assessment of the application by the EMA that is valid for all EU Member States as well as in the three additional EEA member states (Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein). The centralized procedure is compulsory for certain types of medicinal products, including for medicines developed by means of certain biotechnological processes, products designated as orphan medicinal products, advanced therapy medicinal products (gene therapy, somatic cell therapy, or tissue engineered medicines) and medicinal products with a new active substance indicated for the treatment of certain diseases (HIV/AIDS, cancer, neurodegenerative disorders, diabetes, auto-immune and viral diseases). For medicinal products containing a new active substance not yet authorized in the EEA before May 20, 2004 and indicated for the treatment of other diseases, medicinal products that constitute significant therapeutic, scientific or technical innovations or for which the grant of a MA through the centralized procedure would be in the interest of public health at EU level, an applicant may voluntarily submit an application for a MA through the centralized procedure.

Under the centralized procedure, the CHMP established at the EMA, is responsible for conducting the initial assessment of a drug. The CHMP is also responsible for several post-authorization and maintenance activities, such as the assessment of modifications or extensions to an existing MA. Under the centralized procedure, the timeframe for the evaluation of an MAA by the EMA’s CHMP is, in principle, 210 days from receipt of a valid MAA. However, this timeline excludes clock stops, when additional written or oral information is to be provided by the applicant in response to questions asked by the CHMP, so the overall process typically takes a year or more, unless the application is eligible for an accelerated assessment. Accelerated evaluation might be granted by the CHMP in exceptional cases, when a medicinal product is expected to be of a major public health interest, particularly from the point of view of therapeutic innovation. Upon request, the CHMP can reduce the time frame to 150 days if the applicant provides sufficient justification for an accelerated assessment. The CHMP will provide a positive opinion regarding the application only if it meets certain quality, safety and efficacy requirements. This opinion is then transmitted to the EC, which has the ultimate authority for granting MA within 67 days after receipt of the CHMP opinion.

Decentralized Authorization Procedure

Medicines that fall outside the mandatory scope of the centralized procedure have three routes to authorization: (i) they can be authorized under the centralized procedure if they concern a significant therapeutic, scientific or technical innovation, or if their authorization would be in the interest of public health; (ii) they can be authorized under a decentralized procedure where an applicant applies for simultaneous authorization in more than one EU member state; or (iii) they can be authorized in an EU member state in accordance with that state’s national

procedures and then be authorized in other EU countries by a procedure whereby the countries concerned agree to recognize the validity of the original, national MA (mutual recognition procedure).

The decentralized procedure permits companies to file identical MA applications for a medicinal product to the competent authorities in various EU Member States simultaneously if such medicinal product has not received marketing approval in any EU Member State before. This procedure is available for pharmaceutical products not falling within the mandatory scope of the centralized procedure. The competent authority of a single EU Member State, the reference member state, is appointed to review the application and provide an assessment report. The competent authorities of the other EU Member States, the concerned member states, are subsequently required to grant a MA for their territories on the basis of this assessment. The only exception to this is where the competent authority of an EU Member State considers that there are concerns of potential serious risk to public health, the disputed points are subject to a dispute resolution mechanism and may eventually be referred to the EC, whose decision is binding for all EU Member States.

Risk Management Plan

All new MAAs must include a RMP describing the risk management system that a company will put in place and documenting measures to prevent or minimize the risks associated with the product. RMPs are continually modified and updated throughout the lifetime of the medicine as new information becomes available. An updated RMP must be submitted: (i) at the request of EMA or a national competent authority, or (ii) whenever the risk-management system is modified, especially as the result of new information being received that may lead to a significant change to the benefit-risk profile or as a result of an important pharmacovigilance or risk-minimization milestone being reached. The regulatory authorities may also impose specific obligations as a condition of the MA. Since October 20, 2023, all RMPs for centrally authorized products are published by the EMA, subject only to limited redactions.

MA Validity Period

MAs have an initial duration of five years. After these five years, the authorization may subsequently be renewed on the basis of a reevaluation of the risk-benefit balance. Once renewed, the MA is valid for an unlimited period unless the EC or the national competent authority decides, on justified grounds relating to pharmacovigilance, to proceed with only one additional five-year renewal. Applications for renewal must be made to the EMA at least nine months before the five-year period expires.

Any authorization which is not followed by the actual placing of the drug on the EU market (in case of centralized procedure) or on the market of the authorizing member state within three years after authorization ceases to be valid.

For the UK, the period of three years during which the drug has not been marketed in Great Britain will be restarted from the date of conversion to a Great Britain MA. Conversion refers to the procedure by which, as of January 1, 2021, MAs granted on the basis of a centralized procedure in the EU are only valid in Northern Ireland but not in Great Britain, whereas, prior EU authorizations have all been automatically converted into UK MAs effective in Great Britain only.

On the other hand, for the EU, in the case the drug has been marketed in the UK, the placing on the UK market before the end of the period starting when the UK left the EU on January 31, 2020 and ending on December 31, 2020 (the “Brexit Transition Period”) will be taken into account. If, after the end of the Brexit Transition Period, the drug is not placed on any other market of the remaining EU Member States, the three-year period will start running from the last date the drug was placed on the UK market before the end of the Brexit Transition Period.

Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products

In the EU, medicinal products, including advanced therapy medicinal products (“ATMP”) are subject to extensive pre- and post-market regulation by regulatory authorities at both the EU and national levels. ATMPs comprise gene therapy products, somatic cell therapy products and tissue engineered products, which are genes, cells or tissues that have undergone substantial manipulation and that are administered to human beings in order to cure, diagnose or prevent diseases or regenerate, repair or replace a human tissue. Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1394/2007, the Committee for Advanced Therapies (“CAT”) is responsible in conjunction with the CHMP for the evaluation of ATMPs. The CHMP and CAT are also responsible for providing guidelines on ATMPs. These guidelines provide additional guidance on the factors that the EMA will consider in relation to the development and evaluation of ATMPs and include, among other things, the preclinical studies required to characterize ATMPs. Although such guidelines are not legally binding, compliance with them is often necessary to gain and maintain approval for product candidates.

In addition to the mandatory RMP, the holder of a MA for an ATMP must put in place and maintain a system to ensure that each individual product and its starting and raw materials, including all substances coming into contact with the cells or tissues it may contain, can be traced through the sourcing, manufacturing, packaging, storage, transport and delivery to the relevant healthcare institution where the product is used.

Exceptional Circumstances/Conditional Approval

Similar to accelerated approval regulations in the United States, conditional MAs can be granted in the EU in exceptional circumstances. A conditional MA can be granted for medicinal products where, although comprehensive clinical data referring to the safety and efficacy of the medicinal product have not been supplied, a number of criteria are fulfilled: (i) the benefit/risk balance of the product is positive, (ii) it is likely that the applicant will be in a position to provide the comprehensive clinical data, (iii) unmet medical needs will be fulfilled by the grant of the MA and (iv) the benefit to public health of the immediate availability on the market of the medicinal product concerned outweighs the risk inherent in the fact that additional data are still required. Once a conditional MA has been granted, the MA holder must fulfil specific obligations within defined timelines. A conditional MA must be renewed annually, but it can be converted into a standard MA once the MA holder fulfils the obligations imposed and the complete data confirm that the medicine’s benefits continue to outweigh its risks.

Data and Market Exclusivity

As in the United States, it may be possible to obtain a period of market and / or data exclusivity in the EU that would have the effect of postponing the entry into the marketplace of a competitor’s generic, hybrid or biosimilar product (even if the pharmaceutical product has already received a MA) and prohibiting another applicant from relying on the MA holder’s pharmacological, toxicological and clinical data in support of another MA for the purposes of submitting an application, obtaining MA or placing the product on the market. New Chemical Entities (“NCEs”) approved in the EU qualify for eight years of data exclusivity and 10 years of marketing exclusivity.

An additional non-cumulative one-year period of marketing exclusivity is possible if during the data exclusivity period (the first eight years of the 10-year marketing exclusivity period), the MA holder obtains an authorization for one or more new therapeutic indications that are deemed to bring a significant clinical benefit compared to existing therapies.

The data exclusivity period begins on the date of the product’s first MA in the EU. After eight years, a generic product application may be submitted and generic companies may rely on the MA holder’s data. However, a generic product cannot launch until two years later (or a total of 10 years after the first MA in the EU of the

innovator product), or three years later (or a total of 11 years after the first MA in the EU of the innovator product) if the MA holder obtains MA for a new indication with significant clinical benefit within the eight-year data exclusivity period. Additionally, another noncumulative one-year period of data exclusivity can be added to the eight years of data exclusivity where an application is made for a new indication for a well-established substance, provided that significant preclinical or clinical studies were carried out in relation to the new indication. Another year of data exclusivity may be added to the eight years, where a change of classification of a pharmaceutical product has been authorized on the basis of significant pre-trial tests or clinical trials (when examining an application by another applicant for or holder of market authorization for a change of classification of the same substance the competent authority will not refer to the results of those tests or trials for one year after the initial change was authorized).

Products may not be granted data exclusivity since there is no guarantee that a product will be considered by the European Union’s regulatory authorities to include an NCE. Even if a compound is considered to be a NCE and the MA applicant is able to gain the prescribed period of data exclusivity, another company nevertheless could also market another version of the medicinal product if such company can complete a full MAA with their own complete database of pharmaceutical tests, preclinical studies and clinical trials and obtain MA of its product.

On April 26, 2023, the EC submitted a proposal for the reform of the European pharmaceutical legislation. The current draft envisages, e.g., a shortening of the periods of data exclusivity; however, there is currently neither a final version of this draft nor a date for its entry into force. While the European Parliament adopted its approving position on the reform on April 10, 2024, no further required legislative steps have been taken since.

Pediatric Development

In the EU, companies developing a new medicinal product are obligated to study their product in children and must therefore submit a pediatric improvement plan (“PIP”) together with a request for agreement to the EMA. The EMA issues a decision on the PIP based on an opinion of the EMA’s Pediatric Committee. Companies must conduct pediatric clinical trials in accordance with the PIP approved by the EMA, unless a deferral (e.g., until enough information to demonstrate its effectiveness and safety in adults is available) or waiver (e.g., because the relevant disease or condition occurs only in adults) has been granted by the EMA. The MAA for the medicinal product must include the results of all pediatric clinical trials performed and details of all information collected in compliance with the approved PIP, unless a waiver or a deferral has been granted, in which case the pediatric clinical trials may be completed at a later date. Medicinal products that are granted an MA on the basis of the pediatric clinical trials conducted in accordance with the approved PIP are eligible for a six-month extension of the protection under a supplementary protection certificate (if any is in effect at the time of approval) or, in the case of orphan medicinal products, a two-year extension of the orphan market exclusivity. This pediatric reward is subject to specific conditions and is not automatically available when data in compliance with the approved PIP are developed and submitted. An approved PIP is also required when a MA holder wants to add a new indication, medicinal form or route of administration for a medicine that is already authorized and covered by intellectual property rights.

In the UK, the MHRA has published guidance on the procedures for UK PIPs which, where possible, mirror the submission format and requirements of the EU system. EU PIPs remain applicable for Northern Ireland and EU PIPs agreed by the EMA prior to January 1, 2021 have been adopted as UK PIPs.

PRIME Designation

In March 2016, the EMA launched an initiative to facilitate development of product candidates in indications, often rare, for which few or no therapies currently exist. The Priority Medicines (“PRIME”) scheme is intended to encourage drug development in areas of unmet medical need and provides accelerated assessment of products

representing substantial innovation reviewed under the centralized procedure. Products from small- and medium-sized enterprises may qualify for earlier entry into the PRIME scheme than larger companies on the basis of compelling non-clinical data and tolerability data from initial clinical trials. Many 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 marketing authorization application assessment once a dossier has been submitted. Importantly, once a candidate medicine has been selected for the PRIME scheme, a dedicated contact point and rapporteur from the CHMP or from CAT are appointed facilitating increased understanding of the product at EMA’s Committee level. A kick-off meeting with the CHMP/CAT rapporteur initiates these relationships and includes a team of multidisciplinary experts to provide guidance on the overall development plan and regulatory strategy. PRIME eligibility does not change the standards for product approval, and there is no assurance that any such designation or eligibility will result in expedited review or approval.

Post-Approval Regulation

Similar to the United States, both MA holders and manufacturers of medicinal products are subject to comprehensive regulatory oversight by the EMA, the EC and/or the competent regulatory authorities of the EU Member States. This oversight applies both before and after grant of manufacturing licenses and marketing authorizations. It includes control of compliance with EU good manufacturing practices rules, manufacturing authorizations, pharmacovigilance rules and requirements governing advertising, promotion, sale, and distribution, recordkeeping, importing and exporting of medicinal products.

Failure by us or by any of our third-party partners, including suppliers, manufacturers and distributors to comply with EU laws and the related national laws of individual EU Member States governing the conduct of clinical trials, manufacturing approval, MA of medicinal products and marketing of such products, both before and after grant of MA, statutory health insurance, bribery and anti-corruption or 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 MA, product withdrawals and recalls, product seizures, suspension, withdrawal or variation of the MA, total or partial suspension of production, distribution, manufacturing or clinical trials, operating restrictions, injunctions, suspension of licenses, fines and criminal penalties.

The holder of MA for a medicinal product must also comply with EU pharmacovigilance legislation and its related regulations and guidelines, which entail many requirements for conducting pharmacovigilance, or the assessment and monitoring of the safety of medicinal products.

These pharmacovigilance rules can impose on holders of MAs the obligation to conduct a labor intensive collection of data regarding the risks and benefits of marketed medicinal products and to engage in ongoing assessments of those risks and benefits, including the possible requirement to conduct additional clinical studies or post-authorization safety studies to obtain further information on a medicine’s safety, or to measure the effectiveness of risk-management measures, which may be time consuming and expensive and could impact our profitability. MA holders 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 (“PSURs”) in relation to medicinal products for which they hold MAs. The EMA reviews PSURs for medicinal products authorized through the centralized procedure. If the EMA has concerns that the risk benefit profile of a product has varied, it can adopt an opinion advising that the existing MA for the product be suspended, withdrawn or varied. The agency can advise that the MA holder be obliged to conduct post-authorization Phase 4 safety studies. If the EC agrees with the opinion, it can adopt a decision varying the existing MA. Failure by the MA holder to fulfill the obligations for which the EC’s decision provides can undermine the ongoing validity of the MA.

More generally, non-compliance with pharmacovigilance obligations can lead to the variation, suspension or withdrawal of the MA for the product or imposition of financial penalties or other enforcement measures.

The manufacturing process for pharmaceutical products in the European Union is highly regulated, and regulators may shut down manufacturing facilities that they believe do not comply with regulations. Manufacturing requires a manufacturing authorization, and the manufacturing authorization holder must comply with various requirements set out in the applicable EU laws, regulations and guidance, including Directive 2001/83/EC, Directive 2003/94/EC (repealed by Directive 2017/1572 on January 31, 2022), Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 and the European Commission Guidelines for Good Manufacturing Practice. These requirements include compliance with EU cGMP standards when manufacturing pharmaceutical products and active pharmaceutical ingredients, including the manufacture of active pharmaceutical ingredients outside of the European Union with the intention to import the active pharmaceutical ingredients into the European Union. Amendments or replacements of at least Directive 2001/83/EC and Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 are part of the reform proposal for European pharmaceutical legislation Similarly, the distribution of pharmaceutical products into and within the European Union is subject to compliance with the applicable EU laws, regulations and guidelines, including the requirement to hold appropriate authorizations for distribution granted by the competent authorities of the EU Member States. The manufacturer or importer must have a qualified person who is responsible for certifying that each batch of product has been manufactured in accordance with cGMPs, before releasing the product for commercial distribution in the European Union or for use in a clinical trial. Manufacturing facilities are subject to periodic inspections by the competent authorities for compliance with cGMPs.

Sales and Marketing Regulations

The advertising and promotion of our products is also subject to EU laws concerning promotion of medicinal products, interactions with physicians, misleading and comparative advertising and unfair commercial practices. In addition, other national legislation of individual EU Member States may apply to the advertising and promotion of medicinal products and may differ from one country to another. These laws require that promotional materials and advertising in relation to medicinal products comply with the product’s summary of product characteristics (“SmPC”) as approved by the competent regulatory authorities. The SmPC is the document that provides information to physicians concerning the safe and effective use of the medicinal product. It forms an intrinsic and integral part of the marketing authorization granted for the medicinal product. Promotion of a medicinal product that does not comply with the SmPC is considered to constitute off-label promotion. All advertising and promotional activities for the product must be consistent with the approved SmPC and therefore all off-label promotion is prohibited. Direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription-only medicines is also prohibited in the EU. Violations of the rules governing the promotion of medicinal products in the European Union could be penalized by administrative measures, fines and imprisonment. These laws may further limit or restrict the advertising and promotion of our products to the general public and may also impose limitations on our promotional activities with healthcare professionals.

EU regulation with regards to dispensing, sale and purchase of medicines has generally been preserved in the UK following Brexit, through the Human Medicines Regulations 2012. However, organizations wishing to sell medicines online need to register with the MHRA. Following Brexit, the requirements to display the common logo no longer apply to UK-based online sellers, except for those established in Northern Ireland.

Anti-Corruption Legislation

In the EU, interactions between pharmaceutical companies and physicians are also governed by strict laws, regulations, industry self-regulation codes of conduct and physicians’ codes of professional conduct both at EU level and in the individual EU Member States. The provision of benefits or advantages to physicians to induce or

encourage the prescription, recommendation, endorsement, purchase, supply, order or use of medicinal products is prohibited in the European Union. The provision of benefits or advantages to physicians is also governed by the national anti-bribery laws of the EU Member States. Violation of these laws could result in substantial fines and imprisonment.

Payments made to physicians in certain EU Member States also must be publicly disclosed. Moreover, agreements with physicians must often be the subject of prior notification and approval by the physician’s employer, his/her regulatory professional organization, and/or the competent authorities of the individual EU Member States. These requirements are provided in the national laws, industry codes, or professional codes of conduct, applicable in the individual EU Member States. Failure to comply with these requirements could result in reputational risk, public reprimands, administrative penalties, fines or imprisonment.

In the UK, the pharmaceutical sector is recognized as being particularly vulnerable to corrupt practices, some of which fall within the scope of the Bribery Act 2010. Due to the Bribery Act 2010’s far-reaching territorial application, the potential penalized act does not have to occur in the UK to come within its scope. If the act or omission does not take place in the UK, but the person’s act or omission would constitute an offense if carried out there and the person has a close connection with the UK, an offense will still have been committed. The Bribery Act 2010 is comprised of four offenses that cover (i) individuals, companies and partnerships that give, promise or offer bribes, (ii) individuals, companies and partnerships that request, agree to receive or accept bribes, (iii) individuals, companies and partnerships that bribe foreign public officials, and (iv) companies and partnerships that fail to prevent persons acting on their behalf from paying bribes. The penalties imposed under the Bribery Act 2010 depend on the offence committed, harm and culpability and penalties range from unlimited fines to imprisonment for a maximum term of 10 years and in some cases both.

Regulations in the UK and Other Markets

The UK formally left the EU on January 31, 2020 and EU laws now only apply to the UK in respect of Northern Ireland as laid out in the Protocol on Ireland and Northern Ireland and as amended by the Windsor Framework sets out a long-term set of arrangements for the supply of medicines into Northern Ireland. The EU and the UK agreed on a trade and cooperation agreement, which includes provisions affecting the life sciences sector (including on customs and tariffs) specific provisions concerning pharmaceuticals, including the mutual recognition of GMP, inspections of manufacturing facilities for medicinal products and issued GMP documents. The TCA does not, however, contain wholesale mutual recognition of UK and EU pharmaceutical regulations and product standards.

The UK government has adopted the Medicines and Medical Devices Act 2021 (“MMDA”) to enable the existing regulatory frameworks to be updated following the UK’s departure from the EU. The MMDA introduces regulation-making, delegated powers covering the fields of human medicines, clinical trials of human medicines, veterinary medicines and medical devices. The MHRA has since been consulting on future regulations for medicines and medical devices in the UK.

The MMDA supplements the UK Medical Devices Regulations 2002 (the “UK Regulations”), which are based on the EU Medical Devices Directive as amended to reflect the UK’s post-Brexit regulatory regime. Notably, the UK Regulations do not include any of the revisions that have been made by the EU Medical Devices Regulation (EU) 2017/745, which has gained full application in all EU Member States since May 26, 2021, but is not applicable in the UK as “retained law”. Additionally, the MHRA launched a comprehensive consultation in 2021 with proposals to amend the regulatory framework for medical devices in the UK. The stated objectives of the proposals include expansion of the scope of the UK Regulations (for example, by expanding the in vitro diagnostic medical device definition to include software and other products, including products without an intended medical purpose but with similar functioning and risk profiles) and potentially through use of

internationally recognized definitions (for example, by excluding products that contain viable biological substances and excluding food), remove trade barriers, further the availability of medical devices and improve the favorability of the UK market. The consultation period closed on November 25, 2021 and on June 26, 2022, the MHRA published a response to its consultation, which sets out the proposed new UK regulatory framework for medical devices and in vitro diagnostic medical devices. The proposals are intended to improve patient safety and public health through appropriate regulatory oversight, improve the traceability of medical devices, improve the regulation of the rules governing software and AI as medical devices and introduce alternative routes to market to ensure the UK aligns with any superior international best practices. Core aspects of the new framework are expected to apply from July 1, 2025 with appropriate transitional measures and the introduction of secondary legislation.

For other countries outside of the European Union, such as countries in Eastern Europe, Latin America or Asia, the requirements governing the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary from country to country. In all cases, again, the clinical trials must be conducted in accordance with GCP and the applicable regulatory requirements and the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki.

If we fail to comply with applicable foreign regulatory requirements, we may be subject to, among other things, fines, suspension of clinical trials, suspension or withdrawal of regulatory approvals, product recalls, seizure of products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecution.

Regulation of Medical Products in New Zealand

Clinical trials in New Zealand are regulated under the Medicines Act 1981 (“Medicines Act”) and Medicines Regulations 1984.

Clinical trial requirements

The New Zealand Medicines and Medical Devices Safety Authority (“Medsafe”) is the regulatory authority that administers the application and approval process for medicines and clinical trials in New Zealand (under delegation from the Director-General of Health). Approval from Medsafe is required in the following two circumstances:

•

before a medicine can be distributed in New Zealand — see “Approval for distribution” below; however, there is an exemption from this approval requirement for medicines that are imported or manufactured for the sole purpose of use in a clinical trial (including pharmacokinetic, bioequivalence and first-in-human studies); and

•

for all clinical trials involving unapproved medicines carried out in New Zealand; however, if a medicine is already approved by Medsafe for distribution in New Zealand, then there is no separate requirement to obtain approval for clinical trials with that medicine (including if the medicine is being tested for a use not provided for under its existing authorization).

Medsafe also expects all clinical trials to be carried out in accordance with internationally accepted standards for good clinical practice as published by the EMA in its Guideline for Good Clinical Practice, to the extent that these standards are compatible with the Medicines Act.

Clinical trial approval process

The clinical trial approval process requires submission of an online application to Medsafe. The application must include information about the nature of the medicine, the purpose of the trial, details of the investigators conducting the trial, written consent to nomination from each investigator, copies of information supplied to the investigators, a protocol of the trial, and details of the sites and facilities used. The application must be made by the actual or intended importer, manufacturer, packer, or supplier of the medicine in New Zealand. Once

approved, the applicant becomes the “sponsor” and assumes responsibility and legal liability for the trial in New Zealand.

Once an application is received, Medsafe provides it to the Health Research Council of New Zealand (“HRC”). One of two HRC standing committees will consider the application and make a recommendation to Medsafe as to whether the clinical trial should be approved (with or without conditions) or declined.

The Standing Committee on Therapeutic Trials considers pharmaceutical medicine trial applications, while the Gene Technology Advisory Committee considers applications for trials involving gene and other biotechnology therapies. Both standing committees undertake a similar scientific assessment process, and consider factors such as trial protocol and design, data collection, and general compliance with the Guideline for Good Practice before making a recommendation to Medsafe.

Ethical requirements

Medsafe expects all clinical trials to be approved by the Health and Disability Ethics Committee (“HDEC”), regardless of whether Medicines Act approval is required. HDEC reviews and approves applications and provides ongoing oversight of clinical trials to ensure alignment with good ethical practice. HDEC approval can be sought before, during, or after Medicines Act approval is sought from Medsafe.

Registration

A clinical trial’s sponsor may register a trial with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (“ANZCTR”), an online public registry of clinical trials undertaken in New Zealand, Australia, and elsewhere. While not mandatory, the ANZCTR is a recognized part of the World Health Organisation Registry Network and registration is encouraged by the World Health Organisation.

Approval for distribution

If a sponsor decides to distribute the new medicine product in New Zealand after the clinical trial, the sponsor must apply for distribution approval. This is separate to the approval process for clinical trials and involves submitting an application to Medsafe for consideration. Medsafe assesses the safety, efficacy, quality and risk profile of the medicine, and makes a recommendation to the Minister of Health as to whether the medicine should be approved for distribution (in practice, the Minister follows Medsafe’s recommendation).

Employees and Human Capital Resources

As of December 15, 2025, we had seven employees, all of whom were employed full time. None of our employees are represented by a labor union or covered under a collective bargaining agreement. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good.

Legal Proceedings

From time to time, we may be subject to legal proceedings. We are not currently a party to or aware of any proceedings that we believe will have, individually or in the aggregate, a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations. Regardless of outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on us because of defense and settlement costs, diversion of management resources and other factors.

RISK FACTORS

All references to “our product candidates,” “our programs” and “our pipeline” in this prospectus include the research programs with respect to which we have the option to acquire intellectual property license rights to pursuant to the Paragon Option Agreement, which we assumed pursuant to the Asset Acquisition. As of the date of this prospectus, we have exercised the option for DMR-001. We have not exercised the option for DMR-002 or DMR-003 or entered into a license agreement for DMR-001, DMR-002, or DMR-003. We expect to finalize the DMR-001 license agreement in the first quarter of 2026.

Risks Related to Our Limited Operating History, Financial Position and Capital Requirements

There is no guarantee that our acquisition of Damora will increase stockholder value.

In November 2025, we acquired Damora. We cannot guarantee that implementing the Asset Acquisition and related transactions will not impair stockholder value or otherwise adversely affect our business. The Asset Acquisition poses significant integration challenges between our businesses which could result in management and business disruptions, any of which could harm our results of operation, business prospects, and impair the value of the Asset Acquisition to our stockholders.

We are a clinical stage biotechnology company with a limited operating history on which to assess our business; we have no products approved for commercial sale, which may make it difficult to evaluate our current business and likelihood of success and viability.

We are a clinical stage biotechnology company with limited operating history. Since our inception, we have incurred operating losses with no corresponding revenue and have utilized substantially all of our resources to identify, license and develop our product candidates, organize and staff our company and provide other general and administrative support for our operations. We have limited experience as a company in initiating, conducting and completing preclinical studies and clinical trials. In part because of this lack of experience, we cannot be certain that our preclinical studies or clinical trials will begin or be completed on time, if at all. In addition, we have not yet demonstrated an ability to obtain regulatory approvals, manufacture a commercial-scale product or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales, marketing and distribution activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Consequently, any predictions about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a longer operating history.

In addition, as our business grows, we may encounter unforeseen expenses, restrictions, difficulties, complications, delays and other known and unknown factors. We will need to transition at some point from a company with an early research and development focus to a company capable of supporting larger scale clinical trials and eventually commercial activities. We may not be successful in such a transition.

We will require substantial additional capital to finance our operations in the future. If we are unable to raise such capital when needed, or on acceptable terms, we may be forced to delay, reduce and/or eliminate one or more of our research programs or future commercialization efforts.

Developing biotechnology products is a long, time-consuming, expensive and uncertain process that takes years to complete. We expect our expenses to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we conduct preclinical studies and clinical trials of, and seek regulatory approval for our product candidates, advance discovery efforts with respect to our research and research programs, and advance any future programs and product candidates that we may develop or license. Even if one or more of the programs that we develop is approved for commercial sale, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with sales, marketing, manufacturing and distribution activities to launch any such product. Our expenses could increase beyond expectations if we are required by the FDA or other regulatory agencies to perform preclinical studies or clinical trials in addition to or more expansive than those that we currently anticipate. Because the design and outcome of our planned and anticipated clinical trials are highly uncertain, we cannot reasonably estimate the actual amount

of funding that will be necessary to successfully complete the development and commercialization of any program we develop. Our future capital requirements depend on many factors, including but not limited to:

•

the scope, design, progress, results and costs of discovery, preclinical and clinical development for our product candidates;

•

the cost and timing of completion of clinical and commercial-scale manufacturing activities;

•

the costs and timing of preparing, filing and prosecuting patent applications, maintaining, defending and enforcing our intellectual property and proprietary rights, and defending intellectual property-related claims, including claims of infringement, misappropriation or other violations of third-party intellectual property;

•

the costs, timing and outcome of the regulatory review of our product candidates and obtaining the requisite regulatory approvals;

•

the costs of our future commercialization activities, either on our own or in collaboration with others, including product sales, marketing, manufacturing, and distribution for any product candidate for which we receive regulatory approval;

•

the revenue, if any, received from commercial sales of product candidates for which we receive regulatory approval;

•

the success of our current or future collaborations, including our collaboration with Paragon pursuant to the Paragon Option Agreement and any future license agreements we enter into with Paragon;

•

our ability to establish and maintain additional collaborations on favorable terms, if at all;

•

the extent to which we acquire or in-license products, intellectual property and technologies;

•

the costs of operational, financial and management information systems and associated personnel; and

•

the costs of operating as a public company.

As a result, we will require substantial additional funding to continue our operations. As of November 30, 2025, we had $274 million of cash and cash equivalents. We expect that our existing cash and cash equivalents will be sufficient to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements into 2029. We will still need to raise additional capital to continue to fund our operations in the future. If we are unable to raise additional capital when needed, that could raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.

We may be required to seek additional funds sooner than planned through public or private equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations and licensing arrangements or other sources, and adequate additional financing may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. Such financing may dilute our stockholders or the failure to obtain such financing may restrict our operating activities. Any additional fundraising efforts may divert our management from their day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our business. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, the ownership interest of our stockholders will be diluted, and the terms may include liquidation or other preferences and anti-dilution protections that adversely affect the rights of our stockholders. Debt financing may result in the imposition of debt covenants, increased fixed payment obligations or other restrictions that may affect our business. If we raise additional funds through upfront payments or milestone payments pursuant to current or future collaborations with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our product candidates, or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us. Our ability to raise additional capital may be adversely impacted by global macroeconomic conditions and volatility in the credit and financial markets in the United States and worldwide. Our failure to raise capital as and when needed or on acceptable terms would have a negative impact on our financial condition and our ability to pursue our business strategy, and we may have to delay, reduce the scope of, suspend or eliminate one or more of our product candidates, clinical trials or future commercialization efforts or cease our operations.

We expect to continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future and may not be able to achieve or sustain profitability in the future. We have no products approved for sale, have not generated any revenue from our product candidates and may never generate revenue or become profitable.

Investment in biotechnology product development is a highly speculative undertaking and entails substantial upfront capital expenditures and significant risks that any product candidate will fail to demonstrate adequate efficacy or an acceptable safety profile, gain regulatory approval and become commercially viable. We have no products approved for commercial sale, have not generated any revenue from product sales to date, and continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to our ongoing operations. We do not expect to generate product revenue unless or until we successfully complete preclinical and clinical development and obtain regulatory approval of, and then successfully commercialize, at least one of our product candidates. We may never succeed in these activities and, even if we do, may never generate revenues that are significant or large enough to achieve profitability. If we are unable to raise sufficient additional capital to advance a product candidate to commercialization or generate sufficient revenue through the sale of any approved products, we may be unable to continue operations without additional funding.

We have incurred significant net losses in each period since our inception in 2011. For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2025, we had net losses of $3.1 million and $9.1 million, respectively. As of September 30, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $286.6 million. We expect to continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future. Our operating expenses and net losses may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year. We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially if and as we:

•

advance our existing and future product candidates through preclinical and clinical development;

•

seek to identify additional product candidates;

•

maintain, expand, enforce, defend and protect our intellectual property portfolio;

•

seek, obtain and maintain regulatory and regulatory approvals for our product candidates;

•

seek to identify, establish and maintain additional collaborations and license agreements;

•

make milestone payments to Paragon under the Paragon Option Agreement and under any additional future collaboration or license agreements that we enter into;

•

ultimately establish a sales, marketing and distribution infrastructure to commercialize any drug products for which we may obtain regulatory approval, either on our own or in collaboration with others;

•

generate revenue from commercial sales of product candidates for which we receive regulatory approval, if any;

•

hire additional personnel including research and development, clinical and commercial personnel;

•

add operational, financial and management information systems and personnel, including personnel to support our product development;

•

acquire or in-license products, intellectual property and technologies;

•

establish clinical and commercial-scale cGMPs capabilities through a third-party or our own manufacturing facility; and

•

integrate Damora into our operations following the Asset Acquisition.

In addition, our expenses will increase if, among other things, we are required by the FDA or other regulatory authorities to perform clinical trials or studies in addition to, or different than, those that we currently anticipate, there are any delays in completing our clinical trials or the development of any of our product candidates, or there are any third-party challenges to our intellectual property or we need to defend against any intellectual property-related claim.

Even if we obtain regulatory approval for, and are successful in commercializing, one or more of our product candidates, we expect to incur substantial additional research and development and other expenditures to develop and market additional product candidates and/or to expand the approved indications of any marketed product. We may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other unknown factors that may adversely affect our business. The size of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of future growth of our expenses and our ability to generate revenue.

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

Risks Related to Our Discovery, Development and Commercialization

We face competition from entities that have developed or may develop product candidates for the diseases addressed by our product candidates.

The development and commercialization of drugs is highly competitive. Our product candidates, if approved, will face significant competition and our failure to effectively compete may prevent us from achieving significant market penetration. We compete with a variety of multinational biopharmaceutical companies, specialized biotechnology companies and emerging biotechnology companies. If approved for the treatment of patients with mutCALR-driven MPNs, our portfolio of products would compete with hydroxyurea, which is not approved for the treatment of ET in the United States, anagrelide, ruxolitinib, and interferon, which has not been approved for ET, and well as ruxolitnib, momelotinib, pacritinib and fedratinib in MF. In addition, we are aware of several companies with product candidates in development for the treatment of patients with mutCALR-driven MPNs, including Incyte’s INCA033989 and INCA035784, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc.’s JNJ-88549968, Meiji Seika Pharma’s mutCALR TCE, Prelude Therapeutics, LLC’s mCALR CDK9d DAC, Alethio Therapeutics’ AT-02, PharmaEssentia Corporation’s ropeginterferon alfa-2b, Merck & Co., Inc’s bomedemstat, Novartis AG’s pelabresib, Geron Corporation’s imetelstat, and Kartos Therapeutics, Inc.’s navtemadlin. Companies that we are aware of targeting the treatment of AML include large companies with significant financial resources, such as Kyowa Kirin Co., Ltd., Syndax Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Crescent Biopharma, Inc. and Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. We also compete with academic institutions, governmental agencies, and public and private research institutions, among others. Many of the companies with which we are currently competing or will compete against in the future have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals, and regulatory approved products than we do, and are further along in the clinical development and/or commercialization process. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel, establishing clinical trial sites, raising capital, patient registration for clinical trials, establishing and defending rights to intellectual property, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our product candidates.

Our competitors have developed or are developing, and may in the future develop, product candidates or products competitive with our product candidates. Competitive therapeutic treatments include those that have already been approved and accepted by the medical community and any potential new treatments, including those currently under clinical development. Our success will depend partially on our ability to develop and commercialize products that have a competitive safety, efficacy, dosing and/or presentation profile. Our commercial opportunity and success will be reduced or eliminated if competing products are safer, more effective, have a more attractive dosing profile or presentation or are less expensive than the products we develop, or if our competitors develop competing products or biosimilars that enter the market more quickly than we do and are able to gain market acceptance. Conversely, the lack of commercial success of other competing therapies may raise concerns about the financial viability of our product candidates.

In addition, because of the competitive landscape for MPNs and AML indications, we may also face competition for establishing trial sites and clinical trial enrollment. Patient enrollment will depend on many factors, including if potential clinical trial patients choose to undergo treatment with approved products or enroll in competitors’ ongoing clinical trials for product candidates that are under development for the same indications as our product candidates. An increase in the number of approved products for the indications we are targeting with our product candidates will likely further exacerbate this competition. Our inability to enroll a sufficient number of patients could, among other impacts, delay our development timeline, which may further harm our competitive position.

Our programs are in the preclinical stages of development and may fail in development or suffer delays that materially and adversely affect our viability. If we or our current or future collaborators are unable to complete development of or commercialize our product candidates, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.

We have no commercially approved products. Our programs are in the preclinical stages of development, and we have not completed any clinical trials for these product candidates. As a result, we expect it will be many years before we commercialize any product candidate, if ever. Our ability to achieve and sustain profitability depends on obtaining regulatory approvals for, and successfully commercializing, our product candidates, either alone or with third parties, and we cannot guarantee you that we will ever obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates. We have not yet demonstrated our ability to obtain regulatory approvals, manufacture a commercial-scale product or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Before obtaining regulatory approval for the commercial distribution of any product candidate, we or an existing or future collaborator must conduct extensive preclinical tests and clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy in humans of the product candidate.

We or our collaborators may experience delays in initiating or completing preclinical studies or clinical trials. We or our collaborators also may experience numerous unforeseen events during, or as a result of, any future preclinical studies or clinical trials that we could conduct that could delay or prevent our ability to receive regulatory approval or commercialize our product candidates, including:

•

regulators, such as the FDA, institutional review boards (“IRBs”) or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not authorize us or our investigators to commence a clinical trial or conduct a clinical trial at a prospective trial site;

•

we may experience delays in reaching, or fail to reach, agreement on acceptable terms with prospective trial sites and prospective clinical research organizations (“CROs”), the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different CROs and trial sites;

•

clinical trial sites may deviate from the trial protocol, fail to conduct trials in a compliant manner or drop out of a trial, which may require that we add new clinical trial sites or investigators or otherwise negatively impact the timing or integrity of our clinical trial(s);

•

clinical trials of any product candidates may fail to show safety or efficacy, or may produce negative or inconclusive results and we may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional preclinical studies or clinical trials or we may decide to abandon a product research program;

•

the number of subjects required for clinical trials of any product candidates may be larger than we anticipate, and enrollment in these clinical trials may be slower than we anticipate or subjects may drop out of these clinical trials or fail to return for post-treatment follow-up at a higher rate than we anticipate;

•

our third-party contractors may fail to comply with regulatory requirements or meet their contractual obligations to us in a timely manner, or at all, or may deviate from the clinical trial protocol or suffer other quality or performance issues that negatively impact the timing or integrity of our clinical trial(s);

•

we may elect to, or regulators, IRBs or ethics committees may require that we or our investigators, suspend or terminate clinical research or trials for various reasons, including noncompliance with regulatory requirements or a finding that the participants in our clinical trials are being exposed to unacceptable health risks;

•

the cost of clinical trials of any of our product candidates may be greater than we anticipate;

•

the quality of our product candidates or other materials necessary to conduct clinical trials of our product candidates may be inadequate to initiate or successfully complete a given clinical trial;

•

we may be unable to manufacture sufficient quantities of our product candidates for use in clinical trials;

•

reports from clinical testing of other therapies may raise safety or efficacy concerns about our product candidates;

•

we may fail to establish an appropriate safety profile for a product candidate based on clinical or preclinical data for such product candidates as well as data emerging from other therapies in the same class as our product candidates; and

•

the FDA or other regulatory authorities may require us to submit additional data, such as long-term toxicology studies, or impose other requirements before permitting us to initiate a clinical trial.

Commencing clinical trials in the United States is subject to acceptance by the FDA of an IND and finalizing the trial design based on discussions with the FDA. Commencing clinical trials in jurisdictions outside of the United States is similarly subject to acceptance by the applicable regulatory authority of clinical trial documentation following discussions with such authority. In the event that the FDA or other applicable regulatory authority requires us to complete additional preclinical studies or we are required to satisfy other FDA or foreign regulatory authority requests, respectively, prior to commencing clinical trials, the start of our first clinical trial for a product candidate may be delayed. Even after we receive and incorporate guidance from these regulatory authorities, the FDA or other regulatory authorities could disagree as to whether we have satisfied their requirements to commence any clinical trial or change their position on the acceptability of our trial design or the clinical endpoints selected, which may require us to complete additional preclinical studies or clinical trials, delay the enrollment of our clinical trials or impose stricter approval conditions than we currently expect. There are analogous processes and risks applicable to clinical trial applications in other countries, including but not limited to Canada, New Zealand, Australia, countries in the EU and countries in Asia.

We may not have the financial resources to continue development of our product candidates if we experience any issues that delay or prevent regulatory approval of, or our ability to commercialize, our product candidates. We or our current or future collaborators’ inability to complete development of, or commercialize our product candidates, or significant delays in doing so, could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We are substantially dependent on the success of DMR-001, and our anticipated future clinical trials of such product candidate may not be successful.

Our future success is substantially dependent on our ability to timely obtain regulatory approval for, and then successfully commercialize, DMR-001. We are initially investing a majority of our efforts and financial resources into the research and development of this program. We intend to file an IND, or equivalent, for DMR-001 with the FDA in mid-2026 and initiate a Phase 1 trial in ET and MF patients with a subcutaneous formulation thereafter, subject to regulatory approval. The success of DMR-001 is dependent on observing rapid and sustained reduction in excess platelets, the key pathology in ET, compared to other anti-mutCALR antibody product candidates in clinical development. This is based in part on the assumption that the increased in vitro potency and improved pharmacokinetics observed in NHPs will translate into a inhibition of Type 1 and Type 2 mutCALR-dependent cell proliferation and improved pharmacokinetic properties of DMR-001 in humans,

resulting in a more convenient dosing regimen. To the extent we do not observe this inhibition of Type 1 and Type 2 mutCALR-dependent cell proliferation or improved pharmacokinetic properties in our Phase 1 clinical trial of DMR-001 or in additional clinical trials, it would significantly and adversely affect the clinical and commercial potential of DMR-001.

Our product candidates will require additional clinical development, evaluation of clinical, preclinical and manufacturing activities, regulatory approval in multiple jurisdictions, substantial investment and significant marketing efforts before we generate any revenues from product sales. We are not permitted to market or promote these product candidates, or any other product candidates, before we receive regulatory approval from the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities, and we may never receive such regulatory approvals.

The success of our product candidates will depend on a variety of factors. We do not have complete control over many of these factors, including certain aspects of clinical development and the regulatory submission process, potential threats to our intellectual property rights, potential threats from the intellectual property rights of third parties and the manufacturing, marketing, distribution and sales efforts of any current or future collaborator. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that we will ever be able to generate revenue through the sale of these product candidates, even if approved. If we are not successful in obtaining regulatory approval and commercializing DMR-001, DMR-002, DMR-003, GB3226 or future product candidates, or are significantly delayed in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.

GB3226 is currently in preclinical development and we may fail to show that the drug is generally safe and well tolerated and that it may provide clinical benefit for patients.

Preclinical models have demonstrated that GB3226 is active against mixed-lineage leukemia-rearranged (“MLLr”), NPM1m and FLT3+ driven AML, and we believe that GB3226 has the potential to be further developed to become a treatment option for other tumor types. However, we have not yet sufficiently demonstrated a favorable risk-benefit of GB3226 in patients, and we may be unable to establish sufficient efficacy to warrant continued development in this indication and we may fail to show that the drug is generally safe and well tolerated and that it may provide clinical benefit for patients.

If we do not achieve our projected development objectives in the time frames we announce and expect, the commercialization of our product candidates may be delayed which may harm our reputation and prospects, increase our expenses and cause our stock price to decline.

From time to time, we estimate the timing of the anticipated accomplishment of various scientific, clinical, regulatory and other product development goals, which we sometimes refer to as milestones. These milestones may include the commencement or completion of scientific studies and clinical trials, such as the expected timing for the initiation of our Phase 1 clinical trials of DMR-001, DMR-002, DMR-003 and GB3226, the timing for receipt of clinical data, and the timing for the submission of regulatory filings. From time to time, we may publicly announce the expected timing of some of these milestones. All of these milestones are and will be based on numerous assumptions. The actual timing of these milestones can vary dramatically compared to our estimates, in many cases for reasons beyond our control. If we do not meet these milestones as publicly announced, or at all, our prospects and reputation may be adversely affected and our stock price may decline. Additionally, delays relative to our projected timelines are likely to cause overall expenses to increase, which may require us to raise additional capital sooner than expected and prior to achieving targeted development milestones.

The target patient population for the treatment of MPNs is small and has not been definitively determined, and if estimates of the number of treatable patients is lower than expected, our potential revenues from sales of our product candidates, if approved, and our ability to achieve profitability would be compromised.

The estimates of both the number of patients who have MPNs, as well as the subset of patients with the disease in a position to receive treatment from DMR-001 (i.e., those with mutCALR proteins > 42,000 patients in the United States), if approved, may prove to be incorrect. These estimates have been derived from a variety of

sources, including scientific literature, input from physicians that treat patients with the diseases we are targeting, patient foundations and secondary market research databases. For example, estimates of the prevalence of MPNs in certain geographies are based in part on the published prevalence of MPNs among patient populations in the United States split across ethnicities, and our own analyses of prevalence in Europe, and on published disease incidence rates for certain geographies and estimated for the populations of such geographies. Further, new studies may change the estimated incidence or prevalence of MPNs, and any regulatory approvals that patient population. Similar considerations would apply to estimates of patient population for target indications we select for DMR-002, DMR-003 and any future product candidates. Accordingly, our target patient populations may turn out to be lower than expected, in which case the potential revenues from sales of our product candidates, if approved, would be lower than expected.

Our approach to the discovery and development of DMR-001, DMR-002 and DMR-003 is unproven, and we may not be successful in our efforts to build a pipeline of product candidates with commercial value.

Our approach to the discovery and development of our product candidates leverages well-established mechanisms of action and incorporates advanced antibody engineering to optimize half-life and other properties designed to overcome limitations of existing therapies, including increased binding affinity. Our product candidates are purposefully designed to improve upon existing product candidates and products while maintaining the same, well-established mechanisms of action. However, the scientific research that forms the basis of our efforts to develop DMR-001, DMR-002 and DMR-003 using half-life extension technologies and to enhance efficacy through improved binding affinity, including monoclonal antibodies, is ongoing and may not result in viable product candidates. We have limited clinical data on product candidates utilizing monoclonal antibody half-life extension technologies, especially in autoimmune indications, demonstrating whether they are safe or effective for long-term treatment in humans. We also have no clinical data to indicate whether our modifications to enhance binding affinity translate into improved efficacy in humans. The long-term safety and efficacy of DMR-001, DMR-002 and DMR-003 compared to currently approved products is unknown.

We may ultimately discover that utilizing half-life extension technologies for our specific targets and indications and any product candidates resulting therefrom do not possess certain properties required for therapeutic effectiveness. We currently have only preclinical data regarding the increased half-life properties of DMR-001, DMR-002 and DMR-003, and the same results may not be seen in humans. In addition, product candidates using half-life extension technologies may demonstrate different chemical and pharmacological properties in patients than they do in laboratory studies. This technology and any product candidates resulting therefrom may not demonstrate the same chemical and pharmacological properties in humans and may interact with human biological systems in unforeseen, ineffective or harmful ways. Many product candidates that appeared highly promising in preclinical studies or in early-stage clinical trials have failed when advanced into, or further in, clinical development.

In addition, other companies are developing drug products that utilize half-life extension technology in other targets and indications. The failure of those companies to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of their product candidates may be harmful to our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

In addition, we may in the future seek to discover and develop product candidates that are based on novel targets and technologies that are unproven. If our discovery or business development activities fail to identify novel targets or technologies for drug development, or such targets or technologies prove to be unsuitable for treating human disease, we may not be able to develop viable additional product candidates. We and our existing or future collaborators may never receive approval to market and commercialize any product candidate. Even if we or an existing or future collaborator obtains regulatory approval, the approval may be for targets, disease indications or patient populations that are not as broad as we intended or desired or may require labeling that includes significant use or distribution restrictions or safety warnings. If the products resulting from our product candidates prove to be ineffective, unsafe or commercially unviable, our product candidates and pipeline would have little, if any, value, which would have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Preclinical and clinical development involves a lengthy and expensive process that is subject to delays and with uncertain outcomes, and results of earlier studies and trials may not be predictive of future clinical trial results. If our preclinical studies and clinical trials are not sufficient to support regulatory approval of any of our product candidates, we may incur additional costs or experience delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete, the development of such product candidate.

Before obtaining regulatory approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of any product candidate, we must complete preclinical studies and then conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our product candidate in humans. Our clinical trials may not be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all, and failure can occur at any time during the preclinical study or clinical trial process. For example, we depend on the availability of NHPs to conduct certain preclinical studies that we are required to complete prior to submitting an IND and initiating clinical development. There is currently a global shortage of NHPs available for drug development. While we currently do not anticipate that this shortage will materially impact our costs or timelines, a continuing or future shortage could cause the cost of obtaining NHPs for our future preclinical studies to increase significantly or result in delays to our development timelines.

Moreover, enrolling patients in clinical trials for cancer therapies is challenging, as cancer patients will first receive the applicable standard of care. Many patients who respond positively to the standard of care therapy (and thus do not enroll in clinical trials) are believed to have tumor types that may have responded well to our product candidates. This may limit the number of eligible patients able to enroll in our clinical trials and could extend development timelines or increase costs for these programs. Patients who fail to respond positively to the standard of care treatment will be eligible for clinical trials of unapproved drug candidates. However, these patients may have either compromised immune function from prior administration of chemotherapy or an enhanced immune response from the prior administration of checkpoint inhibitors. Either of these prior treatment regimens may render our therapies less effective in clinical trials. We have sought and may continue to seek to mitigate these effects in the future through modification of enrollment eligibility criteria. Additionally, patients who have failed approved therapies will typically have more advanced cancer and a poorer long-term prognosis. If we are unable to initiate or adequately enroll our clinical trial sites, our clinical trials may be delayed.

Furthermore, a failure of one or more clinical trials can occur at any clinical trial phase. The outcome of preclinical studies and early-stage clinical trials may not be predictive of the success of later clinical trials. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain regulatory approval of their product candidates. In addition, we expect to rely on patients to provide feedback on measures such as measures of disease and quality of life, which are subjective and inherently difficult to evaluate. These measures can be influenced by factors outside of our control and can vary widely from day to day for a particular patient, and from patient to patient and from site to site within a clinical trial.

We cannot be sure that the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities will agree with our clinical development plans. However, there is no guarantee the data from such Phase 1 trial will support additional trials. If the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities require us to conduct additional trials or enroll additional patients, our development timelines may be delayed. We cannot be sure that submission of an IND or similar foreign application will result in the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, as applicable, allowing clinical trials to begin in a timely manner, if at all. Moreover, even if these trials begin, issues may arise that could cause regulatory authorities to suspend or terminate such clinical trials. Events that may prevent successful or timely initiation or completion of clinical trials include: inability to generate sufficient preclinical, toxicology or other in vivo or in vitro data to support the initiation or continuation of clinical trials; delays in reaching a consensus with regulatory authorities on study design or implementation of the clinical trials; delays or failure in obtaining regulatory authorization to commence a trial; delays in reaching agreement on acceptable terms with prospective CROs and clinical trial sites, the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different CROs and clinical trial sites; delays in identifying, recruiting and training suitable

clinical investigators; delays in obtaining required IRB approval or positive ethics committee opinions at each clinical trial site; delays in manufacturing, testing, releasing, validating or importing/exporting sufficient stable quantities of our product candidates for use in clinical trials or the inability to do any of the foregoing; failure by our CROs, other third parties or us to adhere to clinical trial protocols; failure to perform in accordance with the FDA’s or any other regulatory authority’s GCP requirements or regulatory guidelines; changes to the clinical trial protocols; clinical sites deviating from trial protocol or dropping out of a trial; changes in regulatory requirements, guidance or clinical trial plans that require amending or submitting new clinical protocols; selection of clinical endpoints that require prolonged periods of observation or analyses of resulting data; transfer of manufacturing processes to new or larger-scale facilities and delays or failure by our contract manufacturing organizations (“CMOs”) or us to make any necessary changes to such manufacturing process; and third parties being unwilling or unable to satisfy their contractual obligations to us.

We could also encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by the IRBs or ethics committees of the institutions in which such clinical trials are being conducted, by the Data Safety Monitoring Board, if any, for such clinical trial or by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Such authorities may suspend or terminate a clinical trial due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical trial protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from the product candidate, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. If we are required to conduct additional clinical trials or other testing of our product candidates beyond those that we currently contemplate, if we are unable to successfully complete clinical trials of our product candidates, if the results of these trials are not positive or are only moderately positive or if there are safety concerns, our business and results of operations would be adversely affected.

We may find it difficult to enroll patients in our clinical trials, particularly given the relatively small patient population. If we encounter difficulties enrolling patients in our future clinical trial of DMR-001 or our other programs, our clinical development activities could be delayed or otherwise adversely affected.

We may experience difficulties in patient enrollment in our current or future clinical trials for a variety of reasons. The timely completion of clinical trials in accordance with their protocols depends, among other things, on our ability to enroll a sufficient number of patients who remain in the trial until our conclusion.

In addition, cancer therapies are sometimes characterized by line of therapy (first, second, third, fourth, etc.), and the FDA often initially approves new therapies only for use in a particular line or lines of therapy. For example, we may initially seek approval of our product candidates as a third-line therapy for patients who have failed other approved treatments. We may subsequently seek approval as a second- and first-line therapy. There is no guarantee that our product candidates, even if initially approved, would be subsequently approved as a second or first line therapy, which may further reduce the number of patients available to us.

Currently, most ET patients are often treated with aspirin alone. However, the remaining ET patients carry a higher risk of clotting and bleeding and are generally treated with hydroxyurea, which is not approved for the treatment of ET in the United States, anagrelide and interferon. In addition, there are several targeted therapies approved for the treatment of AML: enasidenib for patients with mutations in IDH2, marketed as Idhifa^® by Bristol Myers Squibb Company and Servier Pharmaceuticals, or Servier; ivosidenib for patients with mutations in IDH1, marketed as Tibsovo^® by Servier; revumenib for patients with KMT2A rearrangements or NPM1m , marketed as Revuforj^® by Syndax Pharmaceuticals Inc.; ziftomenib for patients with NPM1m, marketed as Komzifti^® by Kura Oncology, Inc. and Kyowa Kirin Co., Ltd.; and a series of drugs approved for patients with genetic alterations in FLT3 including gilteritinib, marketed as Xospata^® by Astellas Pharma Inc., and quizartinib, marketed as Vanflyta^® by Daiichi Sankyo, Inc. Patients may decide, or physicians may recommend, to use such treatments instead of enrolling in clinical trials.

The enrollment of patients in future trials for any of our product candidates will depend on many factors, including:

•

size and nature of the patient population;

•

severity of the disease under investigation;

•

availability and efficacy of approved drugs for the disease under investigation;

•

patient eligibility and exclusion criteria for the trial in question;

•

patients’ and clinicians’ perceived risks and benefits of the product candidate under study;

•

if patients choose to enroll in clinical trials, rather than using approved products, or if our competitors have ongoing clinical trials for product candidates that are under development for the same indications as our product candidates, and patients instead enroll in such clinical trials;

•

efforts to facilitate timely enrollment in clinical trials;

•

patient referral practices of physicians;

•

the ability to monitor patients adequately during and after treatment;

•

proximity and availability of clinical trial sites for prospective patients; and

•

continued enrollment of prospective patients by clinical trial sites.

Additionally, the number of patients required for clinical trials of our product candidates may be larger than we anticipate. Even if we are able to enroll a sufficient number of patients for our future clinical trials, we may have difficulty maintaining patients in our clinical trials. Our inability to enroll or maintain a sufficient number of patients would result in significant delays in completing clinical trials or receipt of regulatory approvals and increased development costs or may require us to abandon one or more clinical trials altogether, which could cause our value to decline, limit our ability to obtain additional financing and otherwise harm our prospects.

Preliminary, “topline” or interim data from our clinical trials that we announce or publish from time to time may change as more patient data become available and are subject to audit and verification procedures.

From time to time, we may publicly disclose preliminary or topline data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials, which are based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data. The results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following a more comprehensive review of the data. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of these data without the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate complete data. As a result, the preliminary or topline 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 or subsequently made subject to audit and verification procedures.

Any preliminary or topline data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. From time to time, we may also disclose interim data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials. Interim data 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. Further, others, including regulatory authorities, may not accept or agree with our assumptions, estimates, calculations, conclusions or analyses or may interpret or weigh the importance of data differently, which could impact the value of the particular product candidate, the approvability or commercialization of the particular product candidate and of us as a company. In addition, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular preclinical study or clinical trial is based on what is typically extensive information, and you or others may not agree with what we determine is material or otherwise appropriate information to include in our disclosure. As a result, you or others may have reached different conclusions based on such extensive

information in comparison to our publicly disclosed conclusion regarding a particular preclinical study or clinical trial. If the preliminary, topline or interim 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 harm our business, operating results, prospects or financial condition.

Our future clinical trials or those of our current or future collaborators may reveal significant adverse events or undesirable side effects not seen in our preclinical studies and may result in a safety profile that could halt clinical development, inhibit regulatory approval or limit commercial potential or market acceptance of any of our product candidates.

Results of our clinical trials could reveal a high or unacceptable severity and prevalence of side effects, adverse events or unexpected characteristics. If significant adverse events or other side effects are observed in any of our future clinical trials, we may have difficulty recruiting patients to such trials, patients may drop out of our trials, or we may be required to abandon the trials or our development efforts of one or more product candidates altogether. For example, although anti-mutCALR monoclonal antibodies have been generally well tolerated in clinical trials to date, four discontinuations out of 55 patients, one of which was due to a treatment-emergent adverse event (“TEAE”), were was reported by Incyte in its Phase 1 trial investigating INCA033989 in ET patients resistant or intolerant to prior cytoreductive therapy. The most frequent grade ≥ 3 TEAEs were neutropenia, amylase increase, anemia and lipase increase. Because DMR-001 will have a similar mechanism of action, it is possible that patients in our future clinical trials could exhibit similar grade TEAEs as well. We, the FDA or other applicable regulatory authorities, or an IRB or ethics committee, may suspend any clinical trials of any product candidate at any time for various reasons, including a belief that subjects or patients in such trials are being exposed to unacceptable health risks or adverse side effects. Some potential products developed in the biotechnology industry that initially showed therapeutic promise in early-stage studies and trials have later been found to cause side effects that prevented their further development. Other potential products have shown side effects in preclinical studies, which side effects do not present themselves in clinical trials in humans. Even if the side effects do not preclude the product candidate from obtaining or maintaining regulatory approval, undesirable side effects may inhibit market acceptance of the approved product due to our tolerability versus other therapies. In addition, an extended half-life could prolong the duration of undesirable side effects, which could also inhibit market acceptance. TEAEs could also affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled subjects to complete our clinical trials or could result in potential product liability claims. Potential side effects associated with our product candidates may not be appropriately recognized or managed by the treating medical staff, as toxicities resulting from our product candidates may not be normally encountered in the general patient population and by medical personnel. Any of these occurrences could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects significantly.

In addition, the anticipated clinical trials of GB3226 will include cancer patients who are critically ill and whose health is deteriorating, and we expect that additional clinical trials of GB3226 and our other product candidates will include similar patients with deteriorating health. The inclusion of critically ill patients in our clinical trials may result in deaths or other adverse medical events due to other therapies or medications that such patients may be using or due to the gravity of such patients’ illnesses.

In addition, even if we successfully advance our product candidates or any future product candidate through clinical trials, such trials will only include a limited number of patients and limited duration of exposure to our product candidates. As a result, we cannot be assured that adverse effects of our product candidates will not be uncovered when a significantly larger number of patients are exposed to the product candidate after approval. Further, any clinical trials may not be sufficient to determine the effect and safety consequences of using our product candidates over a multi-year period.

If any of the foregoing events occur or if one or more of our product candidates prove to be unsafe, our entire pipeline could be affected, any of which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We may expend our limited resources to pursue a particular program and fail to capitalize on programs that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.

Because we have limited financial and managerial resources, we focus our research and development efforts on certain selected programs. For example, we are focused primarily on DMR-001. As a result, we may forgo or delay pursuit of opportunities with other programs 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 current and future research and development of product candidates for specific indications may not yield any commercially viable product candidates. 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 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. In addition, we select product candidates amongst a variety of potential product candidates from Paragon, and the product candidates we select may fail to be viable commercial products or the product candidates we do not select may have a greater likelihood of success.

Any approved products resulting from our current programs or any future program may not achieve adequate market acceptance among clinicians, patients, healthcare third-party payors and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success and we may not generate any future revenue from the sale or licensing of such products.

Even if regulatory approval is obtained for a product candidate resulting from one of our current or future programs, we may not gain market acceptance among physicians, healthcare professionals, patients, healthcare payors or the medical community. We may not generate or sustain revenue from sales of the product due to factors such as whether the product can be sold at a competitive cost and whether it will otherwise be accepted in the market. Market acceptance will depend on many factors, including factors that are not within our control. There are two recently approved products and additional product candidates in later stages of development for the treatment of MPNs, including momelotinib (approved in 2023) and pacritinib (approved in 2022) as well as late-stage ropeginterferon alfa-2b, imetelstat, pelabresib, bomedemstat, and navtemadlin. However, DMR-001 is designed to have improved potency against both Type 1 and Type 2 mutCALR and contain modifications that are known to increase the half-life of antibodies in circulation; to date, no such disease-modifying therapy that reduces platelet counts in ET patients with high risk of clotting and bleeding has been approved by the FDA for the treatment of MPNs, though several such agents are in advanced clinical development and close to approval. Market participants with significant influence over acceptance of new treatments, such as clinicians and third-party payors, may not adopt a biologic that incorporates anti-mutCALR antibodies and half-life extension for our targeted indication, and we may not be able to convince the medical community and third-party payors to accept and use, or to provide favorable reimbursement for, any programs developed by us or our existing or future collaborators. In addition, there are several targeted therapies approved for the treatment of AML: enasidenib for patients with mutations in IDH2, marketed as Idhifa^® by Bristol Myers Squibb Company and Servier Pharmaceuticals, or Servier; ivosidenib for patients with mutations in IDH1, marketed as Tibsovo^® by Servier; revumenib for patients with KMT2A rearrangements or NPM1m, marketed as Revuforj^® by Syndax Pharmaceuticals Inc.; ziftomenib for patients with NPM1m, marketed as Komzifti^® by Kura Oncology, Inc. and Kyowa Kirin Co., Ltd.; and a series of drugs approved for patients with genetic alterations in FLT3 including gilteritinib, marketed as Xospata^® by Astellas Pharma Inc., and quizartinib, marketed as Vanflyta^® by Daiichi Sankyo, Inc. Market acceptance of our product candidates may be negatively impacted by potential poor performance of our competitors, including the occurrence of serious adverse events in such competitors’ clinical trials or failure by such competitors to obtain and maintain regulatory approval for their product candidates. Additionally, although we believe that the improved dosing and convenience we expect our product candidates to provide will improve market acceptance of such product candidates and that our candidates will have a competitive efficacy profile, our predictions may not be accurate and other competitive products may instead gain and hold the applicable market. Sales of medical products also depend on the willingness of clinicians to prescribe the treatment. We cannot predict whether clinicians, clinicians’ organizations, hospitals, other

healthcare providers, government agencies or private insurers will determine that our product is safe, therapeutically effective, cost effective or less burdensome as compared with competing treatments. If any current or future product candidate is approved but does not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by such parties, we may not generate or derive sufficient revenue from that product candidate and may not become or remain profitable.

Certain of our programs may compete with our other programs, which could negatively impact our business and reduce our future revenue.

We are developing DMR-001 for the treatment of ET and MF and intend to develop DMR-002 and DMR-003 for other MPNs, and we may in the future develop programs for additional MPNs. However, developing multiple product candidates for MPNs may negatively impact our business if the product candidates compete with each other. For example, if multiple product candidates are conducting clinical trials at the same time, they could compete for the enrollment of patients. In addition, if multiple product candidates are approved for the same indication, they may compete for market share, which could limit our future revenue.

We plan to conduct clinical trials for product candidates at sites outside the United States, and the FDA may not accept data from trials conducted in such locations.

We are planning to conduct our Phase 1 clinical trial of DMR-001 in several geographies, including potentially the United States and Australia, and we may choose to conduct one or more of our future clinical trials outside the United States in whole or in part. Although the FDA may accept data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States, acceptance of this data is subject to conditions imposed by the FDA. For example, the clinical trial must be well designed and conducted and performed by qualified investigators in accordance with ethical principles. The trial population must also adequately represent the U.S. population, and the data must be applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice in ways that the FDA deems clinically meaningful. In addition, while these clinical trials are subject to the applicable local laws, FDA acceptance of the data will depend on our determination that the trials also complied with all applicable U.S. laws and regulations. Many foreign regulatory authorities have similar requirements for clinical data gathered outside of their respective jurisdictions. In addition, such foreign trials would be subject to the applicable local laws of the foreign jurisdictions where the trials are conducted. There can be no assurance that the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority will accept data from trials conducted outside of the United States or the relevant jurisdiction, as applicable. If the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority does not accept such data, it would likely result in the need for additional trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and would delay or permanently halt our development of the applicable product candidates or delay or prevent regulatory approval for commercialization in the applicable jurisdiction. Even if the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority accepted such data, it could require us to modify our planned clinical trials to receive clearance to initiate such trials in the United States or the relevant jurisdiction, as applicable, or to continue such trials once initiated.

Further, conducting international clinical trials presents additional risks that may delay completion of our clinical trials. These risks include the failure of enrolled patients in foreign countries to adhere to clinical protocol as a result of differences in healthcare services or cultural customs that could restrict or limit our ability to conduct our clinical trials, the administrative burdens of conducting clinical trials under multiple sets of foreign regulations, foreign exchange fluctuations, diminished protection of intellectual property in some countries, as well as political and economic risks relevant to foreign countries.

Risks Related to Our Reliance on Third Parties

We rely on collaborations and licensing arrangements with third parties, including Paragon. If we are unable to maintain these collaborations or licensing arrangements, or if these collaborations or licensing arrangements are not successful, our business could be negatively impacted.

We rely on our collaboration with a third party, Paragon, for a substantial portion of our discovery capabilities and for the rights necessary to develop and commercialize our product candidates. In the future, we could also rely on additional licensing arrangements with third parties. For example, we have entered into the Paragon Option Agreement. However, Paragon could terminate the Paragon Option Agreement under certain circumstances, including our failure to make any payments owed to Paragon under the agreement or any uncured material breach of the agreement by us, in which event we may lose intellectual property rights and may not be able to develop or commercialize the product candidates covered by that agreement, including DMR-001, DMR-002 or DMR-003, as applicable.

In addition, pursuant to our acquisition of Bridge Medicines, we have in-licensed rights to GB3226 from Rockefeller University. This license agreement provides that we are subject to various obligations and conditions, including diligence obligations relating to the commercialization and development of GB3226. If we fail to comply with any of the conditions or obligations or otherwise breach the terms of our license agreement with Rockefeller University, Rockefeller University may have the right to terminate the applicable agreement in whole or in part and thereby extinguish our rights to the licensed technology and intellectual property and/or any rights we have acquired to develop and commercialize GB3226 or other product candidates. The loss of the rights licensed to us under our license agreement with Rockefeller University would eliminate our ability to further develop GB3226.

Collaborations or licensing arrangements that we enter into may not be successful, and any success will depend heavily on the efforts and activities of such collaborators or licensors. If any of our collaborators or licensors experiences delays in performance of, or fails to perform, our obligations under our agreement with us, disagrees with our interpretation of the terms of such agreement or terminates their agreement with us, our pipeline and product candidates and development timeline could be adversely affected. If we fail to comply with any of the obligations under our collaborations or license agreements, including payment terms and diligence terms, our collaborators or licensors may have the right to terminate such agreements, in which event we may lose intellectual property rights and may not be able to develop, manufacture, market or sell the products covered by our agreements or may face other penalties under our agreements. Our collaborators and licensors may also fail to properly maintain or defend the intellectual property we have licensed from them, if required by our agreement with them, leading to the potential invalidation of our intellectual property, or they may even infringe upon our intellectual property rights, any of which could subject us to litigation or arbitration, which would be time-consuming and expensive and could harm our ability to commercialize our product candidates. In addition, collaborators could independently develop, or develop with third parties, products that compete directly or indirectly with our product candidates and products if the collaborators believe that the competitive products are more likely to be successfully developed or can be commercialized under terms that are more economically attractive than ours.

As part of our strategy, we plan to evaluate additional opportunities to enhance our capabilities and expand our development pipeline or add development or commercialization capabilities. We may not realize the benefits of such collaborations, alliances or licensing arrangements. Any of these relationships may require us to incur non-recurring and other charges, increase our near and long-term expenditures, issue securities that dilute our existing stockholders or disrupt our management and business.

We may face significant competition in attracting appropriate collaborators, and more established companies may also be pursuing strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we consider attractive. These companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, financial resources and

greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us, whether they perceive us to be a competitor or for other reasons. Whether we reach a definitive agreement for a collaboration will depend, among other things, upon our assessment of the collaborator’s resources and expertise, the terms and conditions of the proposed collaboration and the proposed collaborator’s evaluation of a number of factors. Collaborations are complex and time-consuming to negotiate, document and execute. In addition, consolidation among large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies has reduced the number of potential future collaborators. We may not be able to negotiate additional collaborations on a timely basis, on acceptable terms or at all. If we fail to enter into collaborations and does not have sufficient funds or expertise to undertake the necessary development and commercialization activities, we may not be able to further develop our product candidates or bring them to market.

Risks associated with the in-licensing or acquisition of product candidates could cause substantial delays in the preclinical and clinical development of our product candidates.

We have relied and continue to rely on Paragon, and expect to rely on our future licensing partners, to (i) conduct research and development in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards, (ii) accurately report the results of all preclinical trials conducted prior to our licensing or acquisition of the relevant product candidates and (iii) correctly collect and interpret the data from these trials. If the research and development processes or the results of the research programs prior to our licensing or acquisition of our product candidates prove to be unreliable, this could result in increased costs and delays in the development of our product candidates, which could adversely affect any future revenue from such product candidates, if approved.

We may also acquire or in-license additional product candidates for preclinical or clinical development in the future as we continue to build our pipeline. The risks associated with acquiring or in-licensing product candidates could result in delays in the commencement or completion of our preclinical studies and clinical trials, if they are ever commenced or completed, and our ability to generate revenues from our product candidates may be delayed. Please see the section titled “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property—If we are unable to obtain or maintain necessary rights to our programs through acquisitions and in-licenses, our business may be materially harmed” below for additional information regarding such risks.

We currently rely, and plan to rely in the future, on third parties to conduct and support our preclinical studies and clinical trials. If these third parties do not properly and successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval of or commercialize our product candidates.

We have utilized and plan to continue to utilize and depend upon independent investigators and collaborators, such as medical institutions, CROs, contract testing labs and strategic partners, to conduct and support our preclinical studies and clinical trials under agreements with us. We will rely heavily on these third parties over the course of our preclinical studies and clinical trials, and we control only certain aspects of their activities. As a result, we will have less direct control over the conduct, timing and completion of these preclinical studies and clinical trials and the management of data developed through preclinical studies and clinical trials than would be the case if we were relying entirely upon our own staff. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our studies and trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards, and our reliance on these third parties does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and our third-party contractors and CROs are required to comply with GCP, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for all of our product candidates in clinical development. If we or any of these third parties fail to comply with applicable GCP regulations, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. 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. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with products manufactured in accordance with cGMPs. Our failure to comply with these requirements may require us to repeat

clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process. Moreover, our business may be implicated if any of these third parties violates federal or state fraud and abuse or false claims laws and regulations or healthcare privacy and security laws, and foreign equivalents.

Any third parties conducting our clinical trials will not be our employees and, except for remedies available to us under our agreements with such third parties, we cannot control whether they devote sufficient time and resources to our programs. These third parties may encounter challenges hiring and retaining sufficient qualified personnel or they may be involved in mergers, acquisitions or similar transactions and may have relationships with other commercial entities, including our competitors, for whom they may also be conducting clinical trials or other product development activities, which could negatively affect their performance on our behalf and the timing thereof and could lead to products that compete directly or indirectly with our current or future product candidates. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, if they need to be replaced or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols or regulatory requirements or for other reasons, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated and we may not be able to complete development of, obtain regulatory approval of or successfully commercialize our product candidates.

In addition, we plan to rely on foreign CROs and CMOs, including WuXi Biologics (Hong Kong) Limited (“WuXi Biologics (Hong Kong)”), for formulation and manufacturing of our Phase 1 clinical trial materials, and will likely continue to rely on foreign CROs and CMOs in the future. WuXi Biologics (Hong Kong) is a subsidiary or affiliate of WuXi Biologics, which was previously identified in the U.S. legislation proposed in 2024 known as the BIOSECURE Act as a biotechnology “company of concern.” The BIOSECURE Act as it was introduced in the House of Representatives in 2024 would have prohibited federal agencies from entering into procurement contracts with, as well as providing grants and loans to, an entity that uses biotechnology equipment or services from a biotechnology company of concern, and includes a grandfathering provision allowing biotechnology equipment and services provided or produced by named “biotechnology companies of concern” under a contract or agreement entered into before the effective date until January 1, 2032. The pathway and timing for the BIOSECURE Act or its provisions to become law is uncertain. Depending on whether the BIOSECURE Act becomes law, what the final language of the BIOSECURE Act includes, and how the law is interpreted by U.S. federal agencies, we could be potentially restricted from pursuing U.S. federal government business or grants in the future if we continue to use WuXi Biologics (Hong Kong) and if WuXi Biologics (Hong Kong) or other parties we contract with are identified as “biotechnology companies of concern” beyond the grandfathering period. Foreign CMOs may be the target of U.S. legislation, including a new version of the BIOSECURE Act, trade restrictions and other foreign regulatory requirements which could increase the cost or reduce the supply of material available to us, delay the procurement or supply of such material, restrict or even prohibit our ability to work with such CMOs, or have an adverse effect on our ability to secure significant commitments from governments to purchase potential therapies.

The biopharmaceutical industry in China is strictly regulated by the Chinese government. Changes to Chinese regulations or government policies affecting biopharmaceutical companies are unpredictable and may have a material adverse effect on our collaborators in China which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In addition, the United States government has imposed significant tariffs on imports from China and other countries and may impose more restrictions on goods, including biologically derived substances, manufactured in or imported from China or other countries or impose other restrictions on companies’ ability to work with Chinese or other foreign counterparties. Evolving changes in China’s public health, economic, political, and social conditions and the uncertainty around China’s relationship with other governments, such as the United States and the UK, could also negatively impact our ability to manufacture our product candidates for our planned clinical trials or have an adverse effect on our ability to secure government funding, which could adversely affect our financial condition and cause us to delay our clinical research programs. Furthermore, if a version of the BIOSECURE Act becomes law, and one or more of our collaborators or vendors in China, including WuXi Biologics (Hong Kong), is deemed to be a biotechnology company of concern, our operations and financial condition may be negatively impacted as a

result of any delays or increased costs arising from the trade restrictions and other foreign regulatory requirements affecting such collaborators. In addition, while we have established relationships with CROs and CMOs outside of China, moving to those suppliers in the event of a geopolitical instability affecting our collaborators in China could introduce delays into the research program.

We rely on the use of third-party CMOs to manufacture our product candidates, and we expect to continue to rely on third-party CMOs to produce our products, if approved. Our business could be adversely affected if we are unable to use third-party manufacturing suites or if the third-party manufacturers encounter difficulties in production.

We do not currently own any facility that may be used as our clinical-scale manufacturing and processing facility and must rely on CMOs to manufacture our product candidates. We have not yet caused our product candidates to be manufactured on a commercial scale and may not be able to do so for any of our product candidates, if approved. We currently have a single source for our supply of our product candidates and recently entered into an agreement with a second supplier. If there should be any disruption in such supply arrangement, including any adverse events affecting our sole supplier, or if we experience delays or difficulties in transferring, or are unable to successfully transfer, our manufacturing processes, it could have a negative effect on the clinical development of our product candidates and other operations while we work to identify and qualify an alternate supply source. We have limited control over the manufacturing process of, and may be dependent on, our contract manufacturing partners for compliance with cGMP requirements and any other regulatory requirements of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for the manufacture of our product candidates. Beyond periodic audits, we have limited control over the ability of our CMOs to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel. If the FDA or another applicable regulatory authority does not approve these facilities for the manufacture of our product candidates or withdraws any approval in the future, we may need to find alternative manufacturing facilities, which would require the incurrence of significant additional costs and delays and materially adversely affect our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for or market our product candidates, if approved. We, or our future contract manufacturers, any current or future collaborators and their contract manufacturers could be subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA, competent authorities of the EU Member States or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, to monitor and ensure compliance with cGMPs. 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 CMOs, to comply with applicable regulations could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including 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 product candidates or products, if approved, and harm our business and results of operations.

Moreover, our CMOs may experience manufacturing difficulties due to resource constraints, supply chain issues, intellectual property disputes or as a result of labor disputes or unstable political environments. If any CMOs on which we will rely fail to manufacture quantities of our product candidates at quality levels necessary to meet regulatory requirements and at a scale sufficient to meet anticipated demand at a commercially reasonable cost, our business, financial condition and prospects could be materially and adversely affected. In addition, our CMOs are responsible for transporting temperature-controlled materials that can be inadvertently degraded during transport due to several factors, rendering certain batches unsuitable for trial use for failure to meet, among others, our integrity and purity specifications. We and any of our CMOs may also face product seizure or detention or refusal to permit the import or export of products. Our business could be materially adversely affected by business disruptions to our third-party providers that could materially adversely affect our anticipated timelines, potential future revenue and financial condition and increase our costs and expenses. Each of these risks could delay or prevent the completion of our preclinical studies and clinical trials or the approval of any of our product candidates by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, result in higher costs or adversely impact commercialization of our product candidates.

Risks Related to Our Business and Operations

In order to successfully implement our plans and strategies, we will need to grow the size of our organization and we may experience difficulties in managing this growth.

We expect to experience significant growth in the number of our employees and the scope of our operations, particularly in the areas of preclinical and clinical drug development, technical operations, clinical operations and regulatory affairs. To manage our anticipated future growth, we must continue to implement and improve our managerial, operational and financial personnel and systems, expand our facilities and continue to recruit and train additional qualified personnel. Due to our limited financial resources and the limited experience of our management team working together in managing a company with such anticipated growth, we may not be able to effectively manage the expansion of our operations or recruit and train additional qualified personnel.

We are highly dependent on our key personnel and anticipate hiring new key personnel. If we are not successful in attracting and retaining highly qualified personnel, we may not be able to successfully implement our business strategy.

Our ability to compete in the highly competitive biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries depends upon our ability to attract and retain highly qualified managerial, scientific and medical personnel. We are highly dependent on our managerial, scientific and medical personnel. Although we have entered into employment agreements with our executive officers, each of them may terminate their employment with us at any time. We do not maintain “key person” insurance for any of our executives or other employees. The loss of the services of our executive officers or other key employees could impede the achievement of our research, development and commercialization objectives and seriously harm our ability to successfully implement our business strategy. Furthermore, replacing executive officers and key personnel may be difficult and may take an extended period of time. If we do not succeed in attracting and retaining qualified personnel, it could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. We could in the future have difficulty attracting and retaining experienced personnel and may be required to expend significant financial resources in our employee recruitment and retention efforts.

Our future growth may depend, in part, on our ability to operate in foreign markets, where we would be subject to additional regulatory burdens and other risks and uncertainties.

Our future growth may depend, in part, on our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates, if approved, in foreign markets for which we may rely on collaboration with third parties. Recent and ongoing changes in the United States trade policy with foreign countries, including the continued uncertainty surrounding U.S. tariffs and potential retaliatory measures by foreign governments, may disrupt the global supply chain for biopharmaceutical products. For example, in September 2025, President Trump announced plans to impose 100% tariffs on imported branded or patented pharmaceuticals, unless the importing company is building U.S. manufacturing capacity. It is not yet clear whether these tariffs would apply to the importation of active pharmaceutical ingredients and possibly bulk drug products that are intended for use in clinical trials and not for commercial sale, which could increase the costs of materials for our clinical trials. Any direct tariffs, if imposed on pharmaceutical products, may result in increased costs for raw materials and contract manufacturing services, reduced ability to source critical CMOs, and a delay in our development timelines.

We are not permitted to market or promote any of our product candidates before we receive regulatory approval from the applicable foreign regulatory authority, and we may never receive such regulatory approval for any of our product candidates. To obtain separate regulatory approval in many other countries, we must comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of such countries regarding safety and efficacy and governing, among other things, clinical trials and commercial sales, pricing and distribution of our product candidates, if approved, and we cannot predict success in these jurisdictions. If we fail to comply with the regulatory requirements in international markets and receive applicable regulatory approvals, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of our product candidates will be harmed and our

business will be adversely affected. Moreover, even if we obtain approval of our product candidates and ultimately commercialize our product candidates in foreign markets, we would be subject to the risks and uncertainties, including the burden of complying with complex and changing foreign regulatory, tax, accounting and legal requirements and reduced protection of intellectual property rights in some foreign countries.

Our estimates of market opportunity and forecasts of market growth may prove to be inaccurate, and even if the markets in which we compete achieve the forecasted growth, our business may not grow at similar rates, or at all.

Our market opportunity estimates and growth forecasts are subject to significant uncertainty and are based on assumptions and estimates which may not prove to be accurate. Our estimates and forecasts relating to size and expected growth of our target market may prove to be inaccurate. Even if the markets in which we compete meet our size estimates and growth forecasts, our business may not grow at similar rates, or at all. Our growth is subject to many factors, including our success in implementing our business strategy, which is subject to many risks and uncertainties.

Our revenue will be dependent, in part, upon the size of the markets in the territories for which we gain regulatory approval, the accepted price for the product, the ability to obtain coverage and reimbursement and whether we own the commercial rights for that territory. If the number of our addressable patients is not as significant as we estimate, the indication approved by regulatory authorities is narrower than we expect or the treatment population is narrowed by competition, physician choice or treatment guidelines, we may not generate significant revenue from sales of such products, even if approved.

Our employees, independent contractors, consultants, commercial collaborators, principal investigators, CROs, CMOs, suppliers and vendors may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements.

We are exposed to the risk that our employees, independent contractors, consultants, commercial collaborators, principal investigators, CROs, CMOs, suppliers and vendors acting for or on our behalf may engage in misconduct or other improper activities. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless or negligent conduct or disclosure of unauthorized activities to us that violates FDA regulations, including those laws requiring the reporting of true, complete and accurate information to the FDA, manufacturing standards, federal and state healthcare laws and regulations, and laws that require the true, complete and accurate reporting of financial information or data. In particular, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, 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. Misconduct by these parties could also involve the improper use of individually identifiable information, including, without limitation, information obtained in the course of clinical trials, which could result in regulatory sanctions and serious harm to our reputation. We have adopted a code of conduct, but it is not always possible to identify and deter misconduct by these parties 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.

Our internal information technology systems, or those of any of our CROs, manufacturers, other contractors or consultants, third party service providers, or existing or future collaborators, may fail or suffer security or data privacy breaches or other unauthorized or improper access to, use of, or destruction of our proprietary or confidential data, employee data or personal data, which could result in additional costs, loss of revenue, significant liabilities, harm to our brand and material disruption of our operations.

In the ordinary course of our business, we and the third parties upon which we rely collect, receive, store, process, generate, use, transfer, disclose, make accessible, protect, secure, dispose of, transmit, and share

(collectively, “Process”) proprietary, confidential, and sensitive data, including personal data, intellectual property, trade secrets, and other sensitive data (collectively, “Sensitive Information”).

Despite the implementation of security measures in an effort to protect systems that store our information, given their size and complexity and the increasing amounts of information maintained on our internal information technology systems and those of our third-party CROs, other contractors (including sites performing our clinical trials), third party service providers and supply chain companies, and consultants, these systems are potentially vulnerable to breakdown or other damage or interruption from service interruptions, system malfunction, natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures, as well as security breaches from inadvertent or intentional actions by our employees, contractors, consultants, business partners and/or other third parties, or from cyber-attacks by malicious third parties, which may compromise our system infrastructure or lead to the loss, destruction, alteration or dissemination of, or damage to, our data.

Some actors now engage and are expected to continue to engage in cyber-attacks, including without limitation nation-state actors for geopolitical reasons and in conjunction with military conflicts and defense activities. During times of war and other major conflicts, we, and the third parties upon which we rely, may be vulnerable to a heightened risk of these attacks, including retaliatory cyber-attacks, that could materially disrupt our systems and operations. In particular, severe ransomware attacks are becoming increasingly prevalent and can lead to significant interruptions in our operations, loss of sensitive data and income, reputational harm, and diversion of funds. Extortion payments may alleviate the negative impact of a ransomware attack, but we may be unwilling or unable to make such payments due to, for example, applicable laws or regulations prohibiting such payments.

To the extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in loss, destruction, unavailability, alteration or dissemination of, or damage to, our data or applications, or for it to be believed or reported that any of these occurred, we could incur liability and reputational damage and the development and commercialization of our product candidates could be delayed. Further, our insurance policies may not be adequate to compensate us for the potential losses arising from any such disruption in, or failure or security breach of, our systems or third-party systems where information important to our business operations or commercial development is stored.

Our remote workforce may create additional risks for our information technology systems and data because our employees work remotely and utilize network connections, computers, and devices working at home, while in transit and in public locations. Additionally, 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.

While we have implemented security measures designed to protect against security incidents, there can be no assurance that these measures will be effective. We may be unable in the future to detect vulnerabilities in our information technology systems because such threats and techniques change frequently, are often sophisticated in nature, and may not be detected until after a security incident has occurred. Further, we may experience delays in developing and deploying remedial measures designed to address any such identified vulnerabilities. Applicable data privacy and security obligations may require us to notify relevant stakeholders of security incidents. Such disclosures are costly, and the disclosure or the failure to comply with such requirements could lead to adverse consequences.

We rely on third-party service providers and technologies to operate critical business systems to Process Sensitive Information in a variety of contexts. 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. In addition, supply-chain attacks have increased in frequency and severity, and we cannot guarantee that third parties’ infrastructure in our supply chain or our third-party partners’ supply chains have not been compromised.

If we (or a third party upon whom we rely) experience a security incident or are perceived to have experienced a security incident, we may experience adverse consequences, such as government enforcement actions (for example, investigations, fines, penalties, audits, and inspections); additional reporting requirements and/or oversight; restrictions on Processing Sensitive Information (including personal data); litigation (including class claims); indemnification obligations; negative publicity; reputational harm; monetary fund diversions; interruptions in our operations (including availability of data); financial loss; and other similar harms. Security incidents and attendant consequences may cause stakeholders (including investors and potential customers) to stop supporting our platform, deter new customers from products, and negatively impact our ability to grow and operate our business.

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. We cannot be sure that our insurance coverage will be adequate or sufficient to protect us from or to mitigate liabilities arising out of our privacy and security practices, that such coverage will continue to be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all, or that such coverage will pay future claims.

We are subject to stringent and changing laws, regulations and standards, and contractual obligations relating to privacy, data protection, and data security. The actual or perceived failure to comply with such obligations could lead to government enforcement actions (which could include civil or criminal penalties), fines and sanctions, private litigation and/or adverse publicity and could negatively affect our operating results and business.

We, and third parties we work with, are or may become subject to numerous domestic and foreign laws, regulations, and standards relating to privacy, data protection, and data security, the scope of which is changing, subject to differing applications and interpretations, and may be inconsistent among countries, or conflict with other rules. In addition, we are and may become subject to the terms of contractual obligations related to privacy, data protection, and data security. Our obligations may also change or expand as our business grows. The actual or perceived failure by us or third parties related to us to comply with such laws, regulations and obligations could increase our compliance and operational costs, expose us to regulatory scrutiny, actions, fines and penalties, result in reputational harm, lead to a loss of customers, result in litigation and liability, and otherwise cause a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

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 may involve the use of hazardous and flammable materials, including chemicals and biological and radioactive materials. 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 commercialization efforts. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations also may result in substantial fines, penalties or other sanctions.

We may be subject to adverse legislative or regulatory tax changes that could negatively impact our financial condition.

The rules governing U.S. federal, state and local income taxation are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) and the U.S. Treasury Department. Changes to tax laws (which changes may have retroactive application) could adversely affect our stockholders or us. We assess the impact of various tax reform proposals and modifications to existing tax treaties in all jurisdictions where we have operations to determine the potential effect on our business and any

assumptions we have made about our future taxable income. We cannot predict whether any specific proposals will be enacted, the terms of any such proposals or what effect, if any, such proposals would have on our business if they were to be enacted.

For example, the United States enacted the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, which implements, among other changes, a 1% excise tax on certain stock buybacks. In addition, beginning in 2022, the Tax Cuts and JOBS Act eliminated the previously available option to deduct research and development expenditures and requires taxpayers to amortize them generally over five years for research activities conducted in the United States and over fifteen years for research activities conducted outside the United States. July 4, 2025, the U.S. Congress enacted the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which includes a provision restoring the immediate deductibility of domestic research and development expenditures. The impact of this newly enacted law on our tax position will depend on how the provision is implemented and interpreted by the IRS and other regulatory authorities. In addition, we have no assurance as to whether, when and how this provision may be subject to further amendment or repeal. Such changes, among others, may adversely affect our effective tax rate, results of operation and financial condition.

We may acquire businesses, product candidates or products, or form strategic alliances, in the future, and may not realize the benefits of such acquisitions.

We may acquire additional businesses or products, form strategic alliances, or create joint ventures with third parties that believe will complement or augment our existing business. If we acquire businesses with promising markets or technologies, we may not be able to realize the benefit of acquiring such businesses if we are unable to successfully integrate them with our existing operations and company culture. We may encounter numerous difficulties in developing, manufacturing and marketing any new product candidates or products resulting from a strategic alliance or acquisition that delay or prevent us from realizing their expected benefits or enhancing our business. There is no assurance that, following any such acquisition, we will achieve the synergies expected in order to justify the transaction, which could result in a material adverse effect on our business and prospects.

We maintain our cash at financial institutions, often in balances that exceed federally-insured limits. The failure of financial institutions could adversely affect our ability to pay our operational expenses or make other payments.

Our cash held in non-interest-bearing and interest-bearing accounts exceeds the FDIC insurance limits. If such banking institutions were to fail, we could lose all or a portion of those amounts held in excess of such insurance limitations. For example, the FDIC took control of Silicon Valley Bank in March 2023. The Federal Reserve subsequently announced that account holders would be made whole. However, the FDIC may not make all account holders whole in the event of future bank failures. In addition, even if account holders are ultimately made whole with respect to a future bank failure, account holders’ access to their accounts and assets held in their accounts may be substantially delayed. Any material loss that we may experience in the future or inability for a material time period to access our cash and cash equivalents could have an adverse effect on our ability to pay our operational expenses or make other payments, which could adversely affect our business.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

Our intellectual property portfolio is at an early stage. Therefore, our ability to obtain and protect our patent rights, and protect other proprietary rights, is uncertain, exposing us to the possible loss of competitive advantage.

We will rely upon a combination of patents, trademarks, trade secret protection, copyrights and confidentiality agreements, licenses and the Paragon Option Agreement to protect the intellectual property related to our programs and technologies and to prevent third parties from competing unfairly with us. Our success depends in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection for our product candidates and their uses, as well

as our ability to operate without infringing on or violating the proprietary rights of others. We do not currently own or license any patents with respect to DMR-001, DMR-002, DMR-003. Paragon has filed patent applications directed to anti-mutCALR monoclonal antibodies, including applications covering composition of matter, pharmaceutical formulations, and methods of using such antibodies, including DMR-001, which we have the option to license pursuant to the Paragon Option Agreement. In addition, with respect to GB3226, we have in-licensed from Rockefeller University a patent portfolio directed to a series of selective inhibitors of ENL/AF9 YEATS. We also own two additional patent families relating to claims covering composition of matter for various C-linked inhibitors of ENL/AF9 YEATS and various inhibitors of ENL/AF9 YEATS and FLT3, combinations with various therapeutic agents, methods of treatment, and methods of administration. In the future, we expect to prosecute underlying intellectual property for DMR-001, DMR-002, DMR-003, GB3226 and some or all of the in-licensed or owned product candidates that we develop.

We may not be able to obtain or protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world and the legal systems in certain countries may not favor enforcement or protection of at least certain patents, trade secrets or other intellectual property. Filing, prosecuting, maintaining and defending patents on product candidates and other related inventions worldwide would be expensive and our intellectual property rights in some foreign jurisdictions can be less extensive than those in the United States; the reverse may also occur. As such, we may not have patents in all countries or all major markets and may not be able to obtain patents in all jurisdictions even if we or our licensor files patent applications to obtain such rights. Our competitors may operate in countries where we do not have patent protection and may be able to freely use our technologies and discoveries in such countries, at least to the extent not forbidden by law.

Our intellectual property portfolio is at an early stage. Except as described above, we do not currently own or license any issued patents or pending patent applications. Our future optioned, in-licensed or owned patent applications may not result in patents being issued. Any issued patents may not afford sufficient protection of our product candidates or their intended uses against competitors, nor can there be any assurance that the patents issued will not be infringed, designed around, or invalidated by third parties, or effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies, products or product candidates. Even if these patents are granted, they may be difficult to enforce. Further, any issued patents that we may license or own covering our product candidates could be narrowed or found invalid or unenforceable if challenged in court or before administrative bodies in the United States or abroad, including the USPTO. If we do not obtain patent coverage for the work we are conducting, or if we obtain such rights but they are invalidated or rendered unenforceable, we may be unable to exclude competitors from pursuing and marketing the same or similar product candidates. Other risks we face if we are not able to obtain and maintain patent coverage for our product candidates are the reduction in valuation of our product candidates, and ultimately of us as a company, by potential investors, and our inability to assert claims for infringement against third parties or counterclaim against such third parties or negotiate more advantageous settlement parameters. Further, if we encounter delays in our clinical trials or delays in obtaining regulatory approval, the period of time during which we could market our product candidates under patent protection would be reduced. Thus, the patents that we may own or license may not afford us any meaningful exclusivity period or competitive advantage.

In addition to seeking patents for some of our technology and product candidates, we may also rely on trade secrets, including unpatented know-how, technology and other proprietary information, to maintain our competitive position. Any disclosure, either intentional or unintentional, by our employees, the employees of third parties with whom we share our facilities or third-party consultants and vendors that we engage to perform research, clinical trials or manufacturing activities, or misappropriation by third parties (such as through a cybersecurity breach) of our trade secrets or proprietary information could enable competitors to duplicate or surpass our technological achievements, thus eroding our competitive position in our market. In order to protect our proprietary technology and processes, we rely in part on confidentiality agreements with our collaborators, employees, consultants, outside scientific collaborators and sponsored researchers and other advisors. These agreements may not effectively prevent disclosure of confidential information and may not provide an adequate remedy in the event of unauthorized disclosure of confidential information. We may need to share our

proprietary information, including trade secrets, with future business partners, collaborators, contractors and others located in countries at heightened risk of theft of trade secrets, including through direct intrusion by private parties or state actors and those affiliated with or controlled by state actors. In addition, while we undertake reasonable efforts to protect our trade secrets and other confidential information from disclosure, others may independently discover trade secrets and proprietary information, and in such cases, we may not be able to assert any trade secret rights against such party. Costly and time-consuming litigation could be necessary to enforce and determine the scope of our proprietary rights and failure to obtain or maintain trade secret protection could adversely affect our competitive business position.

Lastly, if our trademarks and trade names are not registered or adequately protected, then we may not be able to build name recognition in our markets of interest and our business may be adversely affected.

If we are unable to obtain or maintain necessary rights to our programs through acquisitions and in-licenses, our business may be materially harmed.

Because our research programs currently do and may in the future require the use of proprietary rights held by third parties, the growth of our business will depend in part on our ability to acquire, in-license, or use these third-party proprietary rights. We may be unable to acquire or in-license any compositions, methods of use, processes or other third-party intellectual property rights from third parties that we identify as necessary for our programs. The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and a number of more established companies may pursue strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive or necessary. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, capital resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. We also may be unable to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights on terms that would allow us to make an appropriate return on our investment or at all. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property rights or maintain intellectual property rights we obtain in the future, we may have to abandon development of the relevant program, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

While we have the right to control prosecution, defense, maintenance and enforcement of patents in-licensed under the Paragon License Agreements once the trigger for transfer of prosecution control is met, there may be times when rights for patents and patent applications relating to our product candidates are controlled by our future licensors or collaboration partners. For example, Paragon currently has the right to file patent applications and control prosecution with respect to any other inventions that may fall within the Paragon Option Agreement, including those that may apply to DMR-001, DMR-002 and DMR-003. If we, Paragon or any of our future licensors or collaboration partners fail to prosecute, defend, maintain and enforce such patents and patent applications in a manner consistent with our best interests, including by payment of all applicable fees for patents covering our product candidates, we could lose our rights to the intellectual property or our exclusivity with respect to those rights, our ability to develop and commercialize those product candidates may be adversely affected and we may not be able to prevent competitors from making, using and selling competing products. In addition, even if we have the right to control prosecution of patents and patent applications we have licensed to and from third parties, including under future license agreements with Paragon following the point at which such control is assumed, we may still be adversely affected or prejudiced by actions or inactions of Paragon, additional licensees, or licensors and their counsel prior to the date upon which we assume control over patent prosecution. For example, Paragon is responsible for the prosecution, defense, maintenance and enforcement of patents related to DMR-001, DMR-002 and DMR-003. Subsequent to entering into such license agreements, we expect to control patent prosecution over DMR-001, DMR-002 and DMR-003 following the trigger for transfer of prosecution control for the applicable program to us.

Our future licensors may not be the sole and exclusive owners of all rights in the patents we may in-license. If other third parties have rights to our future in-licensed patents, they may be able to license such patents to our

competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technology. This could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

It is possible that we may be unable to obtain licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. Even if we are able to obtain a license, it may be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to redesign our product candidates, or the methods for manufacturing them or to develop or license replacement technology, all of which may not be feasible on a technical or commercial basis. If we are unable to do so, we may be unable to develop or commercialize the affected product candidates, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects significantly. We cannot provide any assurances that third-party patents do not exist which might be enforced against our product candidates, manufacturing methods or future products or methods resulting in either an injunction prohibiting our manufacture or future sales, or, with respect to our future sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties and/or other forms of compensation to third parties, which could be significant.

Disputes may arise between us and our future licensors regarding intellectual property subject to a license agreement, including (but not limited to): the scope of rights granted under the license agreement and other interpretation-related issues; whether and the extent to which our technology and processes infringe on intellectual property of the licensor that is not subject to the licensing agreement; our right to sublicense patents and other rights to third parties; our right to transfer or assign the license; the inventorship and ownership of inventions and know-how resulting from the joint creation or use of intellectual property by our future licensors and us and our partners; and the priority of invention of patented technology. If we or our future licensors breach the terms of our license agreements, such breach may have a material adverse effect on our business and the commercialization efforts for our programs.

We may be subject to intellectual property lawsuits or may need to file lawsuits to protect our intellectual property, which could result in substantial costs and liability and prevent us from commercializing our potential products.

Because the intellectual property landscape in the biotechnology industry is rapidly evolving and interdisciplinary, it is difficult to conclusively assess our freedom to operate and guarantee that we can operate without infringing on or violating third party rights. If certain of our product candidates are ultimately granted regulatory approval, patent rights held by third parties could be alleged to render one or more of our product candidates infringing. If a third party successfully brings a claim against us, and our rights are not held invalid or unenforceable, we may be required to pay substantial damages, be forced to abandon any affected product candidate and/or seek a license from the patent holder. In addition, any intellectual property claims (e.g., patent infringement or trade secret misappropriation) brought against us, whether or not successful, may cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert the attention of our management and key personnel from other business concerns. We cannot be certain that future patents, if filed and issued, owned or licensed by us will not be challenged by others, whether in the course of litigation or in agencies like the USPTO. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of complex intellectual property litigation more effectively than we can because they have substantially greater resources. In addition, any uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of any litigation could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise funds.

Competitors may infringe or otherwise violate our future patents, trademarks, copyrights or other intellectual property. To counter infringement or other violations, we may be required to file claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. Any such claims could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us, including claims alleging that we infringe their patents or other intellectual property rights. In addition, in a patent infringement proceeding, a court or administrative body may decide that one or more of the patents we assert is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, construe the patent’s claims narrowly or refuse to prevent the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology. Similarly, if we assert trademark infringement claims, a court or administrative body may determine that the marks we have

asserted are invalid or unenforceable or that the party against whom we have asserted trademark infringement has superior rights to the marks in question. In such a case, we could ultimately be forced to cease use of such marks. In any intellectual property litigation, even if we are successful, any award of monetary damages or other remedy we receive may not be commercially valuable.

Further, we may be required to protect our future patents, if filed and issued, through procedures created to attack the validity of a patent at the USPTO. An adverse determination in any such submission or proceeding could reduce the scope or enforceability of, or invalidate, our patent rights, which could adversely affect our competitive position. Because of a lower evidentiary standard in USPTO proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in United States federal courts necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a claim invalid even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the claim if first presented in a district court action.

In addition, if our product candidates are found to infringe the intellectual property rights of third parties, these third parties may assert infringement claims against our future licensees or customers and other parties with whom we have business relationships and we may be required to indemnify those parties for any damages they suffer as a result of these claims, which may require us to initiate or defend protracted and costly litigation on behalf of licensees or other parties regardless of the merits of such claims. If any of these claims succeed, we may be forced to pay damages on behalf of those parties or may be required to obtain licenses for the products they use.

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation or other legal proceedings relating to our intellectual property rights, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation or other proceedings.

Our success will depend in part on our and our current and future licensors’ ability to obtain, maintain and enforce patent protection for our licensed intellectual property.

Our success will depend in part on our and our current and future licensors’ (including Paragon’s) ability to obtain, maintain and enforce patent protection for our licensed intellectual property. Currently, Paragon controls the prosecution, maintenance, enforcement and defense of DMR-001, DMR-002 and DMR-003. After entry into license agreements with Paragon for DMR-001, DMR-002 and DMR-003, and once the trigger for transfer of prosecution control is met, we expect to hold such rights. We, Paragon and our future licensors may not successfully prosecute the patent applications that cover our product candidates. In addition, we have in-licensed rights to GB3226 from Rockefeller, and we depend on Rockefeller University to prosecute and maintain patents and otherwise protect the licensed intellectual property related to GB3226. Even if patents are issued in respect of these patent applications, we and our future licensors (including Paragon) may fail to maintain these patents, may determine not to pursue litigation against other companies that are infringing these patents, or may pursue such litigation less aggressively than we would. Without protection for any in-licensed intellectual property, other companies might be able to offer substantially identical products for sale, which could adversely affect our competitive business position and harm our business prospects.

We may be subject to claims that we have wrongfully hired an employee from a competitor or that our employees, consultants or independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information of third parties.

As is common in the biotechnology industry, in addition to our employees, we engage the services of consultants to assist us in the development of our product candidates. Many of these consultants, and many of our employees, were previously employed at, or may have previously provided or may be currently providing consulting services to, other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies including our competitors or potential competitors. We could in the future be subject to claims that we or our employees have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed alleged trade secrets or other confidential information of former employers or competitors. Although

we try to ensure that our employees and consultants do not use the intellectual property, proprietary information, know-how or trade secrets of others in their work for us, we may become subject to claims that we caused an employee to breach the terms of his or her non-competition or non-solicitation agreement, or that we or these individuals have, inadvertently or otherwise, used or disclosed the alleged trade secrets or other proprietary information of a former employer or competitor.

While we may litigate to defend against these claims, even if we are successful, litigation could result in substantial costs and could be a distraction to management and other employees. If our defenses to these claims fail, in addition to requiring us to pay monetary damages, a court could prohibit us from using technologies or features that are essential to our product candidates, if such technologies or features are found to incorporate or be derived from the trade secrets or other proprietary information of the former employers. Moreover, any such litigation or the threat thereof may adversely affect our reputation, our ability to form strategic alliances or sublicense our rights to collaborators, engage with scientific advisors or hire employees or consultants, each of which would have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management.

Changes to patent laws in the United States and other jurisdictions could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our products.

Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of patent laws in the United States, including patent reform legislation such as the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (the “Leahy-Smith Act”) could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our owned and in-licensed patent applications and the maintenance, enforcement or defense of our owned and in-licensed issued patents. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to United States patent law. These changes include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted, redefine prior art, provide more efficient and cost-effective avenues for competitors to challenge the validity of patents, and enable third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent at USPTO-administered post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review, and derivation proceedings. Assuming that other requirements for patentability are met, prior to March 2013, in the United States, the first to invent the claimed invention was entitled to the patent, while outside the United States, the first to file a patent application was entitled to the patent. After March 2013, under the Leahy-Smith Act, the United States transitioned to a first-to-file system in which, assuming that the other statutory requirements for patentability are met, the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether a third party was the first to invent the claimed invention. As such, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation increased the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Additionally, there have been proposals for additional changes to the patent laws of the United States and other countries that, if adopted, could impact our ability to enforce our proprietary technology.

In addition, the patent positions of companies in the development and commercialization of biologics and pharmaceuticals are particularly uncertain. U.S. Supreme Court and U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit rulings have narrowed the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances and weakened the rights of patent owners in certain situations, including in the antibody arts. For example, the United States Supreme Court in Amgen, Inc. v. Sanofi (“Amgen”) recently held that Amgen’s patent claims to a class of antibodies functionally defined by their ability to bind a particular antigen were invalid for lack of enablement where the patent specification provided 26 exemplary antibodies, but the claimed class of antibodies covered a “vast number” of additional antibodies not disclosed in the specification. The Court stated that if patent claims are directed to an entire class of compositions of matter, then the patent specification must enable a person skilled in the art to make and use the entire class of compositions. This decision makes it unlikely that we will be granted U.S. patents with composition of matter claims as broad as Amgen’s directed to antibodies functionally defined

by their ability to bind a particular antigen. Even if we are granted claims directed to functionally defined antibodies, it is possible that a third party may challenge our patents, when issued, relying on the reasoning in Amgen or other precedential court decisions. This combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the validity and enforceability of patents once obtained. Depending on future actions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that could have a material adverse effect on our patent rights and our ability to protect, defend and enforce our patent rights in the future.

In addition, the U.S. Supreme Court’s July 2024 decision to overturn established case law giving deference to regulatory agencies’ interpretations of ambiguous statutory language has introduced uncertainty regarding the extent to which the FDA’s regulations, policies and decisions may become subject to increasing legal challenges, delays, and/or changes. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. Geopolitical instability in the United States and in foreign countries could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution or maintenance of patent applications and the maintenance, enforcement or defense of issued patents. In addition, the Unified Patent Court (“UPC”) entered into force on June 1, 2023. The UPC is a common patent court that hears patent infringement and revocation proceedings effective for EU Member States. This could enable third parties to seek revocation of a European patent in a single proceeding at the UPC rather than through multiple proceedings in each of the jurisdictions in which the European patent is validated.

Although we do not currently own any European patents or applications, if we obtain or license such patents and applications in the future, any such revocation and loss of patent protection could have a material adverse impact on our business and our ability to commercialize or license our technology and products. Moreover, the controlling laws and regulations of the UPC will develop over time and may adversely affect our ability to enforce or defend the validity of any European patents we may obtain. We may decide to opt out from the UPC any future European patent applications that we may file and any patents we may obtain. If certain formalities and requirements are not met, however, such European patents and patent applications could be challenged for non-compliance and brought under the jurisdiction of the UPC. We cannot be certain that future European patents and patent applications will avoid falling under the jurisdiction of the UPC, if we decide to opt out of the UPC.

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

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuities fees and various other governmental fees on patents and/or patent applications are due to be paid to the USPTO and foreign patent agencies in several stages over the lifetime of the patent and/or patent application. The USPTO and various foreign governmental patent agencies also require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. While an inadvertent lapse can in many cases be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which noncompliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Non-compliance events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application include, but are not limited to, failure to respond to official actions within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents. If we fail to maintain any future patents and patent applications, if filed and issued, covering our product candidates, our competitive position would be adversely affected.

We may not identify relevant third-party patents or may incorrectly interpret the relevance, scope or expiration of a third-party patent, which might adversely affect our ability to develop and market our products.

We cannot guarantee that any of our patent searches or analyses, including the identification of relevant patents, the scope of patent claims or the expiration of relevant patents, are complete or thorough, nor can we be certain

that we have identified each and every third-party patent and pending application in the United States and abroad that is relevant to or necessary for the commercialization of our product candidates in any jurisdiction. The scope of a patent claim is determined by an interpretation of the law, the written disclosure in a patent, the patent’s prosecution history and in some cases certain extrinsic evidence of the meaning of terms in a claim. Our interpretation of the relevance or the scope of a patent or a pending application may be incorrect. For example, we may incorrectly determine that our products are not covered by a third-party patent or may incorrectly predict whether a third-party’s pending application will issue with claims of relevant scope. Our determination of the expiration date of any patent in the United States or abroad that we consider relevant may be incorrect. Our failure to identify and correctly interpret relevant patents may negatively impact our ability to develop and market our products.

In addition, because some patent applications in the United States may be maintained in secrecy until the patents are issued, patent applications in the United States and many foreign jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing, and publications in the scientific literature often lag behind actual discoveries, we cannot be certain that others have not filed patent applications for technology covered by our future issued patents or our pending applications, if filed, or that we were the first to invent the technology. Our competitors may have filed, and may in the future file, patent applications covering our products or technology similar to ours. Any such patent application may have priority over our future patent applications or patents, if filed and issued, which could require us to obtain rights to issued patents covering such technologies.

We may become subject to claims challenging the inventorship or ownership of our patents, if issued, and other intellectual property.

We may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an interest in our future patents, if filed and issued, or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. The failure to name the proper inventors on a patent application can result in the patents issuing thereon being invalid or unenforceable. Inventorship disputes may arise from conflicting views regarding the contributions of different individuals named as inventors, the effects of foreign laws where foreign nationals are involved in the development of the subject matter of the patent, conflicting obligations of third parties involved in developing our programs or as a result of questions regarding co-ownership of potential joint inventions. Litigation may be necessary to resolve these and other claims challenging inventorship and/or ownership. Alternatively, or additionally, we may enter into agreements to clarify the scope of our rights in such intellectual property. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees.

Our current or future licensors may have relied on third-party consultants or collaborators or on funds from third parties, such as the U.S. government, such that our licensors are not the sole and exclusive owners of the patents we in-licensed. If other third parties have ownership rights or other rights to our in-licensed patents, they may be able to license such patents to our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technology. This could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

Patent terms may be inadequate to protect our competitive position of our product candidates for an adequate amount of time.

Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, if all maintenance fees are timely paid, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from our earliest U.S. non-provisional filing date. Various extensions may be available, but the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Even if patents covering our product candidates are obtained, once the patent life has expired, we may be open to competition from competitive products, including generics or biosimilars. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and

regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such product candidates might expire before or shortly after such product candidates are commercialized. As a result, our owned and licensed patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.

Our technology licensed from various third parties may be subject to retained rights.

Our future licensors may retain certain rights under the relevant agreements with us, including the right to use or license the licensed technology outside of the scope of our license, use the underlying technology for noncommercial academic and research use, to publish general scientific findings from research related to the technology, and to make customary scientific and scholarly disclosures of information relating to the technology. It is difficult to monitor whether our licensors limit their use of the technology to these uses, and we could incur substantial expenses to enforce our rights to our licensed technology in the event of misuse. In addition, while there are certain restrictions on Paragon’s ability to develop products that could be competitive with ours, these restrictions may not prevent the possible future license or development by Paragon of certain technology that could lead to product candidates competitive with ours. This could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

Risks Related to Government Regulation

The regulatory approval processes of the FDA and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities are lengthy, time-consuming and inherently unpredictable. If we are not able to obtain, or if there are delays in obtaining, required regulatory approvals for our product candidates, we will not be able to commercialize, or will be delayed in commercializing, our product candidates, and our ability to generate revenue will be materially impaired.

The process of obtaining regulatory approvals, both in the United States and abroad, is unpredictable, expensive and typically takes many years following commencement of clinical trials, if approval is obtained at all, and can vary substantially based upon a variety of factors, including the type, complexity and novelty of the product candidates involved. We cannot commercialize product candidates in the United States without first obtaining regulatory approval from the FDA. Similarly, we cannot commercialize product candidates outside of the United States without obtaining regulatory approval from comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of our product candidates, including DMR-001, DMR-002, DMR-003 and GB3226, we must demonstrate through lengthy, complex and expensive preclinical studies and clinical trials that our product candidates are both safe and effective for each targeted indication. Securing regulatory approval also requires the submission of information about the drug manufacturing process to, and inspection of manufacturing facilities by, the relevant regulatory authority. Further, our product candidates may not be effective, may be only moderately effective, may prove to have undesirable or unintended side effects, toxicities or other characteristics, or may fail to improve on the applicable standard of care, any of which may preclude our obtaining regulatory approval. The FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities have discretion in the approval process and may refuse to accept any application or may decide that our data are insufficient for approval and require additional preclinical, clinical or other data. Our product candidates could be delayed in receiving, or fail to receive, regulatory approval for many reasons, including: the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with the design or implementation of our clinical trials; we may be unable to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities that a product candidate is safe and effective for our proposed indication; the results of clinical trials may not meet the level of statistical significance required by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for approval; serious and unexpected drug-related side effects may be experienced by participants in our clinical trials or by individuals using drugs similar to our product candidates; we may be unable to demonstrate that a product candidate’s clinical and other benefits outweigh our safety risks; the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with our interpretation of data from preclinical studies or clinical trials; the data collected from clinical trials of our product candidates may not be acceptable or sufficient to support the

submission of a BLA or other submission or to obtain regulatory approval in the United States or elsewhere, and we may be required to conduct additional clinical trials; the FDA or the applicable foreign regulatory authority may disagree regarding the formulation, labeling and/or the specifications of our product candidates; the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may fail to approve the manufacturing processes or facilities of third-party manufacturers with which we contract for clinical and commercial supplies; and the approval policies or regulations of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may significantly change in a manner rendering our clinical data insufficient for approval.

Of the large number of drugs in development, only a small percentage successfully complete the FDA or applicable foreign regulatory approval processes and are commercialized. The lengthy approval process as well as the unpredictability of future clinical trial results may result in our failing to obtain regulatory approval to market our product candidates, which would significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects.

If we were to obtain approval, regulatory authorities may approve any of our product candidates for fewer or more limited indications than we request, including failing to approve the most commercially promising indications, may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly post-marketing clinical trials, or may approve a product candidate with a label that does not include the labeling claims necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of that product candidate. If we are not able to obtain, or if there are delays in obtaining, required regulatory approvals for our product candidates, we will not be able to commercialize, or will be delayed in commercializing, this could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. In addition, the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities may undergo leadership changes, change their policies, issue additional regulations or revise existing regulations, or take other actions, such as those implemented by the recently established Department of Government Efficiency, which may impact our clinical development plans or prevent or delay approval of our product candidates under development on a timely basis. Such policy or regulatory changes could impose additional requirements upon us that could delay our ability to obtain approvals and increase the costs of compliance. Since the start of President Trump’s administration in 2025, U.S. policy changes have been implemented at a rapid pace and additional changes are likely. It is difficult to predict how executive actions that may be taken under the current administration may affect the FDA’s ability to exercise its regulatory authority. If any actions impose constraints on the FDA’s ability to engage in routine oversight and product review activities in the normal course, our business may be negatively impacted. Additionally, federal government could adopt legislation, regulations or policies that adversely affect our business or create a more challenging and costly environment to pursue the development, approval and commercialization of our product candidates.

We may not be able to meet requirements for the chemistry, manufacturing and control of our product candidates.

In order to receive approval of our products by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities, we must show that we and our contract manufacturing partners are able to characterize, control and manufacture our drug products safely and in accordance with regulatory requirements. This includes manufacturing the active ingredient, developing an acceptable formulation, manufacturing the drug product, performing tests to adequately characterize the formulated product, documenting a repeatable manufacturing process, and demonstrating that our drug products meet stability requirements. Meeting these chemistry, manufacturing and control requirements is a complex task that requires specialized expertise. If we are not able to meet the chemistry, manufacturing and control requirements, we may not be successful in getting our products approved.

Our product candidates for which we intend to seek approval as biologics may face competition from biosimilars sooner than anticipated.

The ACA includes a subtitle called the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (“BPCIA”), which created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are biosimilar to or interchangeable with an FDA-licensed reference biological product. Under the BPCIA, an application for a highly similar or

“biosimilar” product may not be submitted to the FDA until four years following the date that the reference product was first approved by the FDA. In addition, the approval of a biosimilar product may not be made effective by the FDA until 12 years from the date on which the reference product was first approved. During this 12-year period of exclusivity, another company may still market a competing version of the reference product if the FDA approves a full BLA for the competing product containing the sponsor’s own preclinical data and data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of their product.

We believe that any of our product candidates approved as biologics under a BLA should qualify for the 12-year period of exclusivity. However, there is a risk that this exclusivity could be shortened due to congressional action or otherwise, or that the FDA will not consider our product candidates to be reference products for competing products, potentially creating the opportunity for competition sooner than anticipated. Other aspects of the BPCIA, some of which may impact the BPCIA exclusivity provisions, have also been the subject of recent litigation. Moreover, the extent to which a biosimilar, once approved, will be substituted for any reference products in a way that is similar to traditional generic substitution for non-biological products is not yet clear, and will depend on a number of marketplace and regulatory factors that are still developing.

Even if we receive regulatory approval of our product candidates, we will be subject to extensive ongoing regulatory obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense, and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or experience unanticipated problems with our product candidates.

Any regulatory approvals that we may receive for our product candidates will require the submission of reports to regulatory authorities and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate, may contain significant limitations related to use restrictions for specified age groups, warnings, precautions or contraindications, and may include burdensome post-approval study or risk management requirements. For example, the FDA may require a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy, or REMS, in order to approve our product candidates, which could entail requirements for a medication guide, physician training and communication plans or additional elements to ensure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. Comparable foreign regulatory authorities may impose similar requirements. In addition, if the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities approve our product candidates, our product candidates and the activities associated with their development and commercialization, including their design, testing, manufacture, safety, efficacy, recordkeeping, labeling, storage, approval, advertising, promotion, sale, distribution, import and export will be subject to comprehensive regulation by the FDA and other regulatory agencies in the United States and by comparable foreign regulatory authorities. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration, as well as on-going compliance with cGMPs and GCPs for any clinical trials that we conduct following approval. In addition, manufacturers of drug products and their facilities are subject to continual review and periodic, unannounced inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with cGMPs. If we or a regulatory authority discovers previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facilities where the product is manufactured, a regulatory authority may impose restrictions on that product, the manufacturing facility or us, including requiring recall or withdrawal of the product from the market or suspension of manufacturing, delays or restrictions on our ability to conduct clinical trials or delays or refusal to grant a marketing authorization, including full or partial clinical holds on ongoing or planned trials, restrictions on the manufacturing process, warning or untitled letters, civil and criminal penalties, injunctions, product seizures, detentions or import bans, suspension, withdrawal or variation of any marketing authorization that has been granted, voluntary or mandatory publicity requirements and imposition of restrictions on operations, including costly new manufacturing requirements. Similar penalties may apply in case of failure by us or by any of our third-party partners, including suppliers, manufacturers and distributors, to comply with FDA and EU laws and the related national laws of individual EU Member States and other applicable regulatory authorities governing the conduct of clinical trials, manufacturing approval, marketing authorization of medicinal products and marketing of such products, both before and after grant of a marketing authorization, statutory health insurance, bribery and anti-corruption or other applicable regulatory

requirements, including administrative, civil or criminal penalties. The occurrence of any event or penalty described above may inhibit our ability to commercialize our product candidates and generate revenue and could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity.

Disruptions at the FDA, the SEC and other government agencies and regulatory authorities caused by funding shortages or global health concerns could hinder their ability to hire and retain key leadership and other personnel, prevent new products and services from being developed or commercialized in a timely manner or otherwise prevent those agencies from performing normal business functions on which the operation of our business may rely, which could negatively impact our business.

The ability of the FDA to review regulatory filings and our ability to commence human clinical trials can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and statutory, regulatory and policy changes. Average review times at the agency have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of the SEC, and other government agencies on which our operations may rely, including those that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable.

Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may also slow the time necessary for the review and approval of applications for clinical trial or marketing authorization, which would adversely affect our business. For example, in recent years, including in 2018, 2019 and 2025, the U.S. government shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA and the SEC, had to furlough critical employees and stop critical activities. Additionally, action by the Trump administration to limit federal agency budgets or personnel may result in reductions to the FDA’s budget, employees, and operations, which may lead to slower response times and longer review periods, potentially affecting our ability to progress development of our product candidates or obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. Further, future government shutdowns could impact our ability to access the public markets and obtain necessary capital in order to properly capitalize and continue our operations.

If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, or if global health concerns prevent the FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA or other regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We may face difficulties from healthcare and regulatory legislative reform measures.

Existing regulatory policies may change, and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. For example, the Trump administration has discussed several changes to the reach and oversight of the FDA, which could affect its relationship with the pharmaceutical industry, transparency in decision making and ultimately the cost and availability of prescription drugs. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any regulatory approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.

Our business operations and current and future arrangements with investigators, healthcare professionals, consultants, third-party payors, patient organizations and customers will be subject to applicable healthcare regulatory laws, which could expose us to penalties.

and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations. These laws may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we conduct our operations, including how we research, market, sell and distribute our product candidates, if approved.

Ensuring that our internal operations and future business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental laws and regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant penalties, including civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from government-funded healthcare programs, integrity oversight and reporting obligations to resolve allegations of non-compliance, disgorgement, individual imprisonment, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. Further, defending against any such actions can be costly and time-consuming and may require significant personnel resources. Therefore, even if we are successful in defending against any such actions that may be brought against us, our business may be impaired.

Even if we are able to commercialize any product candidates, due to unfavorable pricing regulations and/or third-party coverage and reimbursement policies, we may not be able to offer such product candidates at competitive prices, which would seriously harm our business.

We intend to seek approval to market our product candidates in both the United States and in selected foreign jurisdictions. If we obtain approval in one or more foreign jurisdictions for our product candidates, we will be subject to rules and regulations in those jurisdictions. Our ability to successfully commercialize any product candidates that we may develop will depend in part on the extent to which reimbursement for these product candidates and related treatments will be available from government health administration authorities, private health insurers and other organizations. Government authorities and other third-party payors, such as private health insurers and health maintenance organizations, decide which medications they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels. Government authorities and other third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medications. These entities may create preferential access policies for a competitor’s product, including a branded or generic/biosimilar product, over our products in an attempt to reduce their costs, which may reduce our commercial opportunity.

We are subject to U.S. and certain foreign export and import controls, sanctions, embargoes, anti-corruption laws, and anti-money laundering laws and regulations. We can face criminal liability and other serious consequences for violations, which can harm our business.

We are subject to export control and import laws and regulations, including the U.S. Export Administration Regulations, U.S. Customs regulations, various economic and trade sanctions regulations administered by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Controls, the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, as amended, the U.S. domestic bribery statute contained in 18 U.S.C. § 201, the U.S. Travel Act, the USA PATRIOT Act, and other state and national anti-bribery and anti-money laundering laws in the countries in which we conduct activities. Governmental regulation of the import or export of our drug candidates, or our failure to obtain any required import or export authorization for our candidates, when applicable, could harm international operations. Furthermore, export control laws and economic sanctions prohibit the provision of certain items, technology, and services to countries, governments, and persons targeted by sanctions programs. Anti-corruption laws are interpreted broadly and prohibit companies and their employees, agents, contractors, and other collaborators from authorizing, promising, offering, or providing, directly or indirectly, improper payments or anything else of value to or from recipients in the public or private sector. We may engage third parties to sell our products outside the United States, to conduct clinical trials, and/or to obtain necessary permits, licenses, patent registrations, and other regulatory approvals. We have direct or indirect interactions with officials and employees of government agencies or government-affiliated hospitals, universities, and other organizations. We can be held liable for the corrupt or other illegal activities of our employees, agents, contractors, and other collaborators, even if we do not explicitly authorize or have actual knowledge of such activities. Any violations of the laws and regulations described above may result in substantial civil and criminal fines and penalties, imprisonment, the loss of export or import privileges, debarment, tax reassessments, breach of contract and fraud litigation, reputational harm, and other consequences.

Governments outside the United States tend to impose strict price controls, which may adversely affect our revenue, if any.

In some countries, particularly EU Member States, the pricing of prescription drugs is subject to governmental control. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after receipt of regulatory approval for a therapeutic. In addition, there can be considerable pressure by governments and other stakeholders on prices and reimbursement levels, including as part of cost containment measures. Political, economic and regulatory developments may further complicate pricing negotiations, and pricing negotiations may continue after reimbursement has been obtained. Reference pricing used by various EU Member States and parallel distribution, or arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced EU Member States, can further reduce prices. To obtain coverage and reimbursement or pricing approvals in some countries, we or future collaborators may be required to conduct a clinical trial or other studies that compare the cost-effectiveness of our product candidates to other available therapies in order to obtain or maintain reimbursement or pricing approval. Publication of discounts by third-party payors or authorities may lead to further pressure on the prices or reimbursement levels within the country of publication and other countries. If reimbursement of any product candidate approved for marketing is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, our business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects could be materially and adversely affected.

If we seek and are unable to obtain accelerated approval, the amount, size and duration of our clinical trials could be greater than planned, which could increase the expense, reduce the likelihood, and/or delay the timing of obtaining necessary regulatory approvals. Even if we receive accelerated approval, if confirmatory trials do not verify clinical benefit, or if we do not comply with rigorous post-approval requirements, such authorities may withdraw accelerated approval.

We may seek accelerated approval, or other expedited development, review or approval status, for our product candidates. Even if granted, there is no guarantee that receiving an expedited development, review or approval status from the FDA will lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process, and such status does not increase the likelihood that our product candidates will ultimately receive marketing approval. The FDA may grant accelerated approval to a product designed to treat a serious or life-threatening condition that provides meaningful therapeutic advantage over available therapies and demonstrates an effect on a surrogate endpoint or intermediate clinical endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. If we choose to pursue accelerated approval, there can be no assurance that the FDA will agree that our proposed primary endpoint is an appropriate surrogate endpoint. Similarly, there can be no assurance that after subsequent FDA feedback that we will continue to pursue accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review, or approval, even if we initially decide to do so. Furthermore, if we submit an application for accelerated approval, there can be no assurance that such application will be accepted or that approval will be granted on a timely basis, or at all. The FDA also could require us to conduct further studies or trials prior to considering our application or granting approval of any type. We might not be able to fulfill the FDA’s requirements in a timely manner, which would cause delays, or approval might not be granted because our submission is deemed incomplete by the FDA. Accelerated approval may be contingent on the sponsor’s agreement to conduct, in a diligent manner, additional post-approval confirmatory studies to verify and describe the drug’s predicted effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. Under the Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act of 2022, the FDA may require, as appropriate, that such studies be underway prior to approval or within a specific time period after the date of approval for a product granted accelerated approval. The FDA may require that any such confirmatory study be initiated or substantially underway prior to the submission of an application for accelerated approval. Even if we receive accelerated approval from the FDA, we will be subject to rigorous post-approval requirements, including submission to the FDA of all promotional materials prior to their dissemination. The FDA could withdraw accelerated approval for multiple reasons, including our failure to conduct any required post-approval study with due diligence, or the inability of such study to confirm the drug’s predicted clinical benefit relative to its risks. A failure to obtain accelerated approval or any other form of expedited review or approval for a product candidate could result in a longer time period prior to commercializing such product

candidate, increase the cost of development of such product candidate, and harm our competitive position in the marketplace. Comparable considerations apply outside of the United States.

General Risk Factors

We may become exposed to costly and damaging liability claims, when testing a product candidate in the clinical stage or at the commercial stage, and our product liability insurance may not cover all damages from such claims.

We are exposed to potential product liability and professional indemnity risks that are inherent in the research, development, manufacturing, marketing and use of pharmaceutical products. While we currently have no products that have been approved for commercial sale, the future use of a product candidate in clinical trials, and the sale of any approved products in the future, may expose us to liability claims. These claims may be made by patients that use the product or product candidate, healthcare providers, pharmaceutical companies, or others selling such product. Any claims against us, regardless of their merit, could be difficult and costly to defend and could materially and adversely affect the market for our products or any prospects for commercialization of our products. Although we intend to obtain product liability insurance for our future clinical trials, it is possible that our liabilities could exceed our insurance coverage or that in the future we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or obtain insurance coverage that will be adequate to satisfy any liability that may arise. If a successful product liability claim or series of claims is brought against us for uninsured liabilities or in excess of insured liabilities, our assets may not be sufficient to cover such claims and our business operations could be impaired.

Litigation costs and the outcome of litigation could have a material adverse effect on our business.

From time to time, we may be subject to litigation claims through the ordinary course of our business operations regarding, but not limited to, securities litigation, employment matters, security of patient and employee personal information, contractual relations with collaborators and licensors and intellectual property rights. Litigation to defend ourselves against claims by third parties, or to enforce any rights that we may have against third parties, could result in substantial costs and diversion of our resources, causing a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Our business could be adversely affected by economic downturns, inflation, fluctuating interest rates, natural disasters, public health crises, political crises, geopolitical events, or other macroeconomic conditions, which could have a material and adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

The global economy, including credit and financial markets, has experienced extreme volatility and disruptions, including, among other things, diminished liquidity and credit availability, declines in consumer confidence, declines in economic growth, supply chain shortages, increases in inflation rates, fluctuating interest rates, and uncertainty about economic stability. Adverse macroeconomic conditions, including inflation, slower growth or recession, new or increased tariffs imposed by the U.S. government and potential retaliatory measures by foreign governments and other barriers to trade, especially in light of recent comments and executive orders made by the Trump administration, changes to fiscal and monetary policy or government budget dynamics (particularly in the pharmaceutical and biotech areas), government shutdowns, tighter credit, higher interest rates, volatility in financial markets, high unemployment, labor availability constraints, currency fluctuations and other challenges in the global economy have in the past adversely affected, and may in the future adversely affect, we and our business partners and suppliers. For example, the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in widespread unemployment, economic slowdown and extreme volatility in the capital markets. In addition, the U.S. has imposed and taken action to pause, resume or adjust tariffs on imports from a number of countries. Since February 2025, the United States government has imposed various tariffs on imports from most countries, including tariffs on imports from China and South Korea. In September 2025, President Trump announced plans to impose 100% tariffs on imported branded or patented pharmaceuticals, unless the importing company is building U.S. manufacturing

capacity. It is not yet clear whether these tariffs would apply to the importation of active pharmaceutical ingredients and possibly bulk drug products that are intended for use in clinical trials and not for commercial sale, which could increase the costs of materials for our clinical trials. There still remains substantial uncertainty about the duration of existing tariffs and whether additional tariffs may be imposed, modified or suspended. Historically, tariffs have led to increased trade and political tensions. In response to tariffs, other countries have implemented retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods. Uncertainty and political tensions as a result of trade policies could reduce trade volume, investment, technological exchange and other economic activities between major international economies, resulting in a material adverse effect on global economic conditions and the stability of global financial markets. The Federal Reserve has raised interest rates multiple times in recent years in response to concerns about inflation and it may raise them again. High interest rates, coupled with reduced government spending and volatility in financial markets, may increase economic uncertainty and affect consumer spending. Similarly, the ongoing military conflict between Russia and Ukraine and in the Middle East and rising tensions with China have created extreme volatility in the global capital markets and may have further global economic consequences, including disruptions of the global supply chain. Any such volatility and disruptions may adversely affect our business or the third parties on whom we rely. If the equity and credit markets deteriorate, including as a result of political unrest or war, it may make any necessary debt or equity financing more costly, more dilutive, or more difficult to obtain in a timely manner or on favorable terms, if at all. Increased inflation rates can adversely affect us by increasing our costs, including labor and employee benefit costs.

We may in the future experience disruptions as a result of such macroeconomic conditions, including delays or difficulties in initiating or expanding clinical trials and manufacturing sufficient quantities of materials. Any one or a combination of these events could have a material and adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition.

Risks Related to the Ownership of Our Common Stock

The market price of our Common Stock has been and is expected to continue to be volatile.

The market price of our Common Stock has been and is expected to continue to be subject to significant fluctuations. Some of the factors that may cause the market price of our Common Stock to fluctuate include:

•

results of clinical trials and preclinical studies of our product candidates, or those of our competitors or our existing or future collaborators;

•

failure to meet or exceed financial and development projections we may provide to the public;

•

failure to meet or exceed the financial and development projections of the investment community;

•

if we do not achieve the perceived benefits of our recent merger as rapidly or to the extent anticipated by financial or industry analysts;

•

announcements of significant acquisitions, strategic collaborations, joint ventures or capital commitments by us or our competitors;

•

actions taken by regulatory agencies with respect to our product candidates, clinical studies, manufacturing process or sales and marketing terms;

•

disputes or other developments relating to proprietary rights, including patents, litigation matters, and our ability to obtain patent protection for our technologies;

•

additions or departures of key personnel;

•

significant lawsuits, including patent or stockholder litigation;

•

if securities or industry analysts do not publish research or reports about our business, or if they issue adverse or misleading opinions regarding our business and stock;

•

changes in the market valuations of similar companies;

•

general market or macroeconomic conditions or market conditions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology sectors;

•

sales of securities by us or our securityholders in the future;

•

if we fail to raise an adequate amount of capital to fund our operations or continued development of our product candidates;

•

trading volume of our Common Stock;

•

announcements by competitors of new commercial products, clinical progress or lack thereof, significant contracts, commercial relationships or capital commitments;

•

adverse publicity relating to precision medicine product candidates, including with respect to other products in such markets;

•

the introduction of technological innovations or new therapies that compete with our products and services; and

•

period-to-period fluctuations in our financial results.

Moreover, the stock markets in general have experienced substantial volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of individual companies. These broad market fluctuations may also adversely affect the trading price of our Common Stock. In addition, a recession, depression or other sustained adverse market event could materially and adversely affect our business and the value of our Common Stock. In the past, following periods of volatility in the market price of a company’s securities, stockholders have often instituted class action securities litigation against such companies. Furthermore, market volatility may lead to increased shareholder activism if we experience a market valuation that activists believe is not reflective of our intrinsic value. Activist campaigns that contest or conflict with our strategic direction or seek changes in the composition of our board of directors could have an adverse effect on our operating results, financial condition and cash flows.

We are governed by Delaware law and our Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws, provisions of which have anti-takeover implications.

Provisions that are included in our Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws may discourage, delay or prevent a merger, acquisition or other change in control of the Company that our stockholders may consider favorable, including transactions in which holders of Common Stock might otherwise receive a premium price for their shares. These provisions could also limit the price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for shares of our Common Stock, thereby depressing the market price of our Common Stock. In addition, because the Board of Directors is responsible for appointing our management team, these provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management by making it more difficult for our stockholders to replace members of the Board of Directors. Among other things, these provisions will:

•

continue the use of a classified board of directors such that not all members of our Board of Directors are elected at one time;

•

allow the authorized number of directors to be changed only by resolution of the Board of Directors;

•

limit the manner in which our stockholders can remove directors from the Board of Directors;

•

provide for advance notice requirements for nominations for election to the Board of Directors or for proposing matters that can be acted on at stockholder meetings

•

require that stockholder actions must be effected at a duly called stockholder meeting and prohibit actions by our stockholders by written consent;

•

limit who may call a special meeting of stockholders;

•

authorize the Board of Directors to issue preferred stock without stockholder approval, which could be used to institute a “poison pill” that would work to dilute the stock ownership of a potential hostile acquirer, effectively preventing acquisitions that have not been approved by the Board of Directors;

•

require the approval of the holders of at least 66 2∕3% of the voting rights to amend or repeal certain provisions of the Certificate of Incorporation or Bylaws; and

•

require the affirmative vote of not less than 66 2/3% of the outstanding shares of capital stock entitled to vote on the matter to amend or repeal the Bylaws if the Board of Directors does not recommend the same.

Moreover, we and our organizational documents are governed by Delaware law. Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law (“DGCL”) contains provisions that may enable our board of directors to discourage, delay or prevent a change in our ownership or in our management. The business combinations with interested stockholders provisions of the DGCL, subject to certain exceptions, restrict our ability to engage in any business combination with an interested stockholder for a three year period following the time that this stockholder becomes an interested stockholder, unless (i) before the stockholder became an interested stockholder, our board of directors approved either the business combination or the transaction which resulted in the stockholder becoming an interested stockholder; (ii) upon consummation of the transaction which resulted in the stockholder becoming an interested stockholder, the interested stockholder owned at least 85% of the voting stock of the corporation outstanding at the time the transaction commenced, excluding for purposes of determining the voting stock outstanding, shares owned by persons who are directors and also officers, and employee stock plans, in some instances, but not the outstanding voting stock owned by the interested stockholder; or (iii) at or after the time the stockholder became an interested stockholder, the business combination was approved by our board of directors and authorized at an annual or special meeting of the stockholders by the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of the outstanding voting stock which is not owned by the interested stockholder. For purposes of the foregoing provisions, “interested stockholder”, with certain exceptions is any entity or person beneficially owning 15% or more of the outstanding voting stock of the corporation and any entity or person affiliated with or controlling or controlled by the entity or person at any time in the last three-year period.

Additionally, the Series B Certificate of Designation may delay or prevent a change in control of the Company. At any time while at least 30% of the originally issued Series B Preferred Stock remains issued and outstanding, we will not, without the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the then outstanding shares of the Series B Preferred Stock, (i) consummate (x) any Fundamental Transaction (as defined in the Series B Certificate of Designation) or (y) any merger or consolidation of the Company with or into another entity or any stock sale to, or other business combination in which our stockholders immediately before such transaction do not hold at least a majority of our capital stock of immediately after such transaction, (ii) increase the size of the Board of Directors, (iii) adopt, amend or repeal any written delegation of authority policy, corporate authority matrix or similar document, framework or schedule unless such adoption, amendment or repeal has been approved by the unanimous vote of the Board of Directors, or (iv) retain or replace our registered independent public accounting firm, independent compensation consultant or corporate counsel.

Because our Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws limit the court in which you may bring an action against us, you may have difficulty obtaining a more favorable judicial forum or you may incur more expense enforcing any rights which you may claim as compared to another forum.

Our Certificate of Incorporation and our Bylaws provide that, to the extent permitted by law, any person who acquires equity in our company shall be deemed to have notice and consented to the forum selection provision of our bylaws, which require actions to be brought only in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, which may inhibit or deter stockholders’ actions (i) brought in the name of our company or on our behalf; (ii) asserting a claim for breach of any fiduciary duty owed by any of our directors, officers, employees or agents to us or our stockholders; (iii) arising or asserting a claim arising pursuant to any provision of Delaware General Corporation Law or any provision of our Certificate of Incorporation or Bylaws; (iv) to interpret, apply, enforce or determine the validity of any provision of our Certificate of Incorporation or Bylaws; or (v) asserting a claim governed by

the internal affairs doctrine. This exclusive forum provision may limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain what they believe to be a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us and our officers and directors. This provision does not apply to claims brought under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act.

Any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in any of our securities shall be deemed to have notice of and consented to this provision. These exclusive-forum provisions may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum of its choosing for disputes with us or our directors, officers, or other employees, which may discourage lawsuits against us and our directors, officers, and other employees. If a court were to find either exclusive-forum provision in our bylaws to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving the dispute in other jurisdictions, which could harm our results of operations.

We will incur additional costs and increased demands upon management as a result of complying with the laws and regulations affecting public companies.

We will incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses as a public company, including costs associated with public company reporting obligations under the Exchange Act. Our executive officers and other personnel need to devote substantial time to comply with public company reporting requirements and additional applicable laws and obligations. Any changes we make to comply with these obligations may not be sufficient to allow us to satisfy our obligations as a public company on a timely basis, or at all. These reporting requirements, rules and regulations, coupled with the increase in potential litigation exposure associated with being a public company, could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on the Board of Directors or on board committees or to serve as executive officers, or to obtain certain types of insurance, including directors’ and officers’ insurance, on acceptable terms.

Once we are no longer a smaller reporting company or otherwise no longer qualify for applicable exemptions, we will be subject to additional laws and regulations affecting public companies that will increase our costs and the demands on management and could harm our operating results and cash flows.

We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, which require, among other things, that we file with the SEC, annual, quarterly and current reports with respect to our business and financial condition as well as other disclosure and corporate governance requirements. However, as a “smaller reporting company,” as such term is defined in Rule 12b-2 under the Exchange Act, in at least the near term, we may take advantage of exemptions from disclosure requirements and reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements. In addition, as a smaller reporting company with less than $100.0 million in annual revenue, we are not required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Once we are no longer a smaller reporting company or otherwise no longer qualify for these exemptions, we will be required to comply with these additional legal and regulatory requirements applicable to public companies and will incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses to do so. If we are not able to comply with the requirements in a timely manner or at all, our financial condition or the market price of our Common Stock may be harmed. For example, if we or our independent auditor identifies deficiencies in our internal control over financial reporting that are deemed to be material weaknesses, we could face additional costs to remedy those deficiencies, the market price of our stock could decline or we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by the SEC or other regulatory authorities, which would require additional financial and management resources.

If we fail to maintain proper and effective internal controls, our ability to produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis could be impaired.

We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the rules and regulations of Nasdaq. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that we maintain effective

disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting. We must perform system and process evaluation and testing of our internal control over financial reporting to allow management to report on the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting in our Annual Report on Form 10-K filing for that year, as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

We may discover weaknesses in our system of internal financial and accounting controls and procedures that could result in a material misstatement of our financial statements. Our internal control over financial reporting will not prevent or detect all errors and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the control system’s objectives will be met. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that misstatements due to error or fraud will not occur or that all control issues and instances of fraud will be detected.

If we are not able to comply with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, or if we are unable to maintain proper and effective internal controls, we may not be able to produce timely and accurate financial statements. If that were to happen, the market price of our Common Stock could decline and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by Nasdaq, the SEC or other regulatory authorities.

We do not anticipate that we will pay any cash dividends in the foreseeable future.

The current expectation is that we will retain our future earnings, if any, to fund the growth of our business as opposed to paying dividends. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, of our Common Stock will be the sole source of gain, if any, for our stockholders for the foreseeable future.

Future sales of shares by existing stockholders could cause our stock price to decline.

If existing securityholders sell, or indicate an intention to sell, substantial amounts of our Common Stock in the public market after legal restrictions on resale in connection with our recent merger lapse, the trading price of our Common Stock could decline. In addition, shares of Common Stock that are subject to outstanding options will become eligible for sale in the public market to the extent permitted by the provisions of various vesting agreements and Rules 144 and 701 under the Securities Act. If these shares are sold, the trading price of our Common Stock could decline.

Our executive officers, directors and principal stockholders have the ability to control or significantly influence all matters submitted to our stockholders for approval.

Our executive officers, directors and principal stockholders, in the aggregate, beneficially own a significant portion of our outstanding shares of common stock (on a fully-diluted basis), subject to beneficial ownership limitations. As a result, if these stockholders were to choose to act together, they would be able to control or significantly influence all matters submitted to our stockholders for approval, as well as our management and affairs. For example, these stockholders, if they choose to act together, would control or significantly influence the election of directors and approval of any merger, consolidation or sale of all or substantially all of our assets. This concentration of voting power could delay or prevent an acquisition of us on terms that other stockholders may desire.

Conflicts of interest may arise between us and Paragon or us and Fairmount.

In connection with the Asset Acquisition, we assumed the rights and obligations of Damora under the Paragon Option Agreement. See the section titled “Paragon Option Agreement” for more information on the Paragon Option Agreement. Paragon and Paramora each beneficially own more than 5% of a class of our voting securities through their respective holdings of our Common Stock, although neither are expected to own more than 5% following the Conversion Approval. Fairmount beneficially owns more than 5% of Paragon, appointed Paragon’s

board of directors, and has the contractual right to approve the appointment of any executive officers of Paragon. Paramora is an entity formed by Paragon as a vehicle to hold equity in Damora (and as a result of the Asset Acquisition, us) in order to share profits with certain employees of Paragon. Fairmount beneficially owns 19.99% of our Common Stock assuming conversion of the Series B Preferred Stock and Series C Preferred Stock into common stock (in each case, subject to beneficial ownership limitations and based on the number of shares of common stock outstanding as of December 1, 2025, and assuming no exercise of outstanding options). Three of our directors are affiliated with Fairmount (Peter Harwin, Christopher Cain, Ph.D., and Julianne Bruno) and were appointed in accordance with the Acquisition Agreement. The remaining four members of the Board of Directors, constituting a majority of the Board of Directors, are not affiliated with Fairmount or Paragon.

Our relationship with Paragon, Paramora, Fairmount and our non-employee directors may create, or may create the appearance of, conflicts of interest when we are faced with decisions that could have different implications for Paragon or Paramora than the decisions have for us. For example, such conflicts may arise in connection with the selection of additional targets, the exercise of options under the Paragon Option Agreement, the negotiation of the terms of any future license agreements, the allocation of resources and expenses, the enforcement or defense of intellectual property rights, the pursuit of strategic partnerships or transactions, or the resolution of any disputes that may arise between us and Paragon or Paramora. We expect that the decision to amend the Paragon Option Agreement or enter into any similar agreements or license agreements with Paragon will be subject to the approval of the Board of Directors. All directors of the Board of Directors owe fiduciary duties pursuant to Delaware law, and directors of the Board of Directors are expected to comply with their respective fiduciary duties under Delaware law relevant to related party transactions. We have previously adopted a related party transaction approval policy and our audit committee will be responsible for the review, consideration and approval or ratification of related party transactions.

Furthermore, because Paragon and Fairmount have interests in other biotechnology companies that may compete with us or pursue similar or complementary product candidates or technologies, they may have an incentive to favor or support such other companies over us. These potential conflicts of interest may make it more difficult for us to favorably advance our business interests and may adversely affect our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

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

The trading market for our Common Stock is influenced by the research and reports that equity research analysts publish about us and our business. Equity research analysts may elect to not provide research coverage of our Common Stock, and such lack of research coverage may adversely affect the market price of our Common Stock. In addition, we do not have any control over the analysts or the content and opinions included in their reports. The price of our Common Stock could decline if one or more equity research analysts downgrade our stock or issue other unfavorable commentary or research. If one or more equity research analysts cease coverage of us or fail to publish reports on us regularly, demand for our Common Stock could decrease, which in turn could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline.

Our ability to use net operating loss (“NOL”) carryforwards and other tax attributes may be limited, including as a result of our recent merger.

We do not expect to become profitable in the near future and may never achieve profitability. As of December 31, 2024, we had federal and state NOL carryforwards and federal and state research and development credits that may be used to offset future taxable income. Under current law, our U.S. federal NOLs incurred in tax years beginning after December 31, 2017 may be carried forward indefinitely, but the deductibility of such net operating loss carryforwards is limited to 80% of taxable income. It is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to federal law. In addition, under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”), U.S. federal NOL carryforwards and other tax attributes may become subject to an annual limitation in

the event of certain cumulative changes in ownership. An “ownership change” pursuant to Section 382 of the Code generally occurs if one or more stockholders or groups of stockholders who own at least 5% of a company’s stock increase their ownership by more than 50 percentage points over their lowest ownership percentage within a rolling three-year period. Our ability to utilize our net operating loss carryforwards and other tax attributes to offset future taxable income or tax liabilities may be limited as a result of ownership changes, including, as discussed above, in connection with our recent merger or other transactions. Similar rules may apply under state tax laws. If we earn taxable income, such limitations could result in increased future income tax liability to us, and our future cash flows could be adversely affected.

The class structure of our capital stock may limit your ability to influence corporate matters and may limit your visibility with respect to certain transactions.

The class structure of our capital stock may limit your ability to influence corporate matters. Holders of Common Stock are entitled to one vote per share, while holders of the Series A Preferred Stock, Series B Preferred Stock and Series C Preferred Stock are not entitled to any votes. Nonetheless, each share of Series A Preferred Stock, and, following approval of the Conversion Proposal, each share of Series B Preferred Stock and Series C Preferred Stock, may be converted at any time into 1,000 shares of Common Stock at the option of the holder by providing written notice to us, subject to beneficial ownership limitations and the limitations provided for in our Certificate of Incorporation and the related certificates of designation. Consequently, if holders of the Series A Preferred Stock, Series B Preferred Stock and Series C Preferred Stock exercise their option to make this conversion, this will have the effect of increasing the relative voting power of those prior holders of the Series A Preferred Stock, Series B Preferred Stock and Series C Preferred Stock, respectively, and correspondingly decreasing the voting power of the holders of Common Stock, which may limit your ability to influence corporate matters. On the third business day following approval of the Conversion Proposal, each share of Series C Preferred Stock will automatically convert into shares of Common Stock, subject to certain limitations,

Although Series B Preferred Stock does not have voting rights on proposals presented to our holders of common stock, at any time while at least 30% of the originally issued Series B Preferred Stock remains issued and outstanding, we will not, without the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the then outstanding shares of the Series B Preferred Stock, (i) consummate (x) any Fundamental Transaction (as defined in the Series B Certificate of Designation) or (y) any merger or consolidation of the Company with or into another entity or any stock sale to, or other business combination in which our stockholders immediately before such transaction do not hold at least a majority of our capital stock immediately after such transaction, (ii) increase the size of the Board of Directors, (iii) adopt, amend or repeal any written delegation of authority policy, corporate authority matrix or similar document, framework or schedule unless such adoption, amendment or repeal has been approved by the unanimous vote of the Board of Directors, or (iv) retain or replace our registered independent public accounting firm, independent compensation consultant or corporate counsel.

Additionally, stockholders who hold, in the aggregate, more than 10% of Common Stock, Series A Preferred Stock, Series B Preferred Stock and Series C Preferred Stock, but 10% or less of Common Stock, and are not otherwise an insider, may not be required to report changes in their ownership due to transactions in the Series A Preferred Stock, Series B Preferred Stock and Series C Preferred Stock pursuant to Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act, and may not be subject to the short-swing profit provisions of Section 16(b) of the Exchange Act.

INCORPORATION OF INFORMATION BY REFERENCE

The SEC allows us to “incorporate by reference” information that we file with the SEC, which means that we can disclose important information to you by referring you to those other documents. The information incorporated by reference is an important part of this prospectus, and information we file later with the SEC will automatically update and supersede this information. A Current Report (or portion thereof) furnished, but not filed, on Form 8-K shall not be incorporated by reference into this prospectus. We incorporate by reference the documents listed below and any future filings we make with the SEC under Section 13(a), 13(c), 14, or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, including all filings made after the date of the filing of this registration statement and prior to the effectiveness of this registration statement, except, in each case, as to any portion of any future report or document that is not deemed filed under such provisions, prior to the termination of any offering of securities made by this prospectus:

•

our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024, filed with the SEC on March 19, 2025, including certain information incorporated by reference therein from our Definitive Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A for our 2025 annual meeting of stockholders filed with the SEC on April 30, 2025;

•

our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarters ended March 31, 2025, June 30, 2025 and September 30, 2025 and filed with the SEC on May 8, 2025, August 5, 2025 and November 6, 2025;

•

our Current Reports on Form 8-K (except for information contained therein which is furnished rather than filed) filed on June 20, 2025 and November 10, 2025 (as amended on December 9, 2025); and

•

the description of our Common Stock contained in our registration statement on Form 8-A filed with the SEC on October 23, 2020 under Section 12 of the Exchange Act, including any amendment or report filed for the purpose of updating such description.

We will furnish without charge to you, on written or oral request, a copy of any or all of such documents that has been incorporated herein by reference (other than exhibits to such documents unless such exhibits are specifically incorporated by reference into the documents that this prospectus incorporates). Written or oral requests for copies should be directed Galecto, Inc., Attn: Investor Relations, 75 State Street, Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109, telephone number (+45) 70 70 52 10. See the section of this prospectus entitled “Where You Can Find More Information” for information concerning how to read and obtain copies of materials that we file with the SEC.

Any statement contained in this prospectus, or in a document all or a portion of which is incorporated by reference, shall be modified or superseded for purposes of this prospectus to the extent that a statement contained in this prospectus, any prospectus supplement or any document incorporated by reference modifies or supersedes such statement. Any such statement so modified or superseded shall not, except as so modified or superseded, constitute a part of this prospectus.

USE OF PROCEEDS

We are not selling any securities under this prospectus and we will not receive any proceeds from the sale of the Resale Shares covered hereby. The net proceeds from the sale of the Resale Shares offered by this prospectus will be received by the Selling Stockholders.

Subject to limited exceptions, the Selling Stockholders will pay any underwriting discounts and commissions and expenses incurred by the Selling Stockholders for brokerage, accounting, tax or legal services or any other expenses incurred by the Selling Stockholders in disposing of any of the Resale Shares. We will bear the costs, fees and expenses incurred in effecting the registration of the Resale Shares covered by this prospectus, including all registration and filing fees, Nasdaq listing fees and fees and expenses of our counsel and our independent registered public accounting firm.

SELLING STOCKHOLDERS

This prospectus covers the resale or other disposition from time to time by the Selling Stockholders identified in the table below of up to an aggregate of 60,513,309 shares of Common Stock, which represents the total number of shares of Common Stock issued to the Selling Stockholders pursuant to the Acquisition Agreement or issuable upon the conversion of the Series B Preferred Stock and Series C Preferred Stock issued pursuant to the Acquisition Agreement and the Securities Purchase Agreement. The Selling Stockholders may from time to time offer and sell any or all of the Resale Shares set forth below pursuant to this prospectus and any accompanying prospectus supplement.

On November 10, 2025, we entered into the Securities Purchase Agreement, pursuant to which we sold an aggregate of 39,641 shares of Series C Preferred Stock, which are convertible into 39,641,000 shares of Common Stock pursuant to the Series C Certificate of Designation, at an aggregate purchase price of approximately $285 million. Also on November 10, 2025, we completed our acquisition of Damora in accordance with the Acquisition Agreement, pursuant to which we issued an aggregate of 265,309 shares of Common Stock, 16,366 shares of Series B Preferred Stock, which are convertible into 16,366,000 shares of Common Stock pursuant to the Series B Certificate of Designation, and 4,241 shares of Series C Preferred Stock, which are convertible into 4,241,000 shares of Common Stock pursuant to the Series C Certificate of Designation, to certain of the Selling Stockholders.

We are registering the Resale Shares to permit the Selling Stockholders and their pledgees, donees, transferees or other successors-in interest that receive their shares after the date of this prospectus to resell or otherwise dispose of the shares in the manner contemplated under “Plan of Distribution” herein.

Except as otherwise disclosed herein, the Selling Stockholders do not have, and within the past three years have not had, any position, office or other material relationship with us.

The following table sets forth the names of the Selling Stockholders, the number of shares of our Common Stock owned by the Selling Stockholders, the number of shares of our Common Stock that may be offered under this prospectus and the number of shares of our Common Stock that will be owned after this offering by the Selling Stockholders assuming all of the shares registered for resale hereby are sold.

The Selling Stockholders may sell some, all or none of their Resale Shares. We do not know how long the Selling Stockholders will hold the Resale Shares before selling them, and we currently have no agreements, arrangements or understandings with the Selling Stockholders regarding the sale or other disposition of any of the Resale Shares, except for lock-up agreements with certain Damora stockholders as of immediately prior to the Asset Acquisition, pursuant to which each such Selling Stockholder is subject to a 180-day lockup on the sale or transfer of shares of Common Stock held by each such Selling Stockholder at the closing of the Transactions. The Resale Shares covered hereby may be offered from time to time by the Selling Stockholders, provided that Resale Shares issued upon conversion of Series B Preferred Stock and Series C Preferred Stock may only be offered after such shares of Series B Preferred Stock and Series C Preferred Stock, respectively, are converted to Common Stock pursuant to the terms of the Series B Certificate of Designation and Series C Certificate of Designation, respectively.

The information set forth below is based upon information obtained from the Selling Stockholders and upon information in our possession regarding the issuance of the Series B Preferred Stock, Series C Preferred Stock, and Merger Common Shares in connection with the Transactions. The percentages of Common Stock owned after the offering by each Selling Stockholder below are based on 1,595,161 shares of Common Stock outstanding as of December 1, 2025, and, for each Selling Stockholder, assumes the conversion of only the Series B Preferred Stock and Series C Preferred Stock owned by such Selling Stockholder but not the Series B Preferred Stock and Series C Preferred Stock owned by any other Selling Stockholder.


Name of Selling Stockholders(1)	Common Stock Beneficially Owned Before Offering (2)		Common Stock that May Be Offered Pursuant to Prospectus		Common Stock Beneficially Owned After Offering (2)
					Number		Percentage (%)
Entities associated with Fairmount Funds Management LLC (3)		26,801,000		26,801,000		—		—
Paragon Therapeutics, Inc. (4)		2,045,473		2,045,473		—		—
Paramora Holding LLC (5)		2,045,473		2,045,473
Fidelity Advisor Series VII: Fidelity Advisor Health Care Fund (6)		150,000		100,000		50,000		*
Fidelity Select Portfolios: Select Health Care Portfolio (6)		260,000		100,000		160,000		3.2	%
Variable Insurance Products Fund IV: VIP Health Care Portfolio (6)		128,878		100,000		28,878		*
Fidelity Advisor Series VII: Fidelity Advisor Biotechnology Fund (6)		100,000		100,000		—		—
Fidelity Mt. Vernon Street Trust: Fidelity Series Growth Company Fund (6)		215,000		215,000		—		—
Fidelity Mt. Vernon Street Trust: Fidelity Growth Company Fund (6)		900,000		900,000		—		—
Fidelity Growth Company Commingled Pool (6)		1,298,000		1,298,000		—		—
Fidelity Mt. Vernon Street Trust: Fidelity Growth Company K6 Fund (6)		279,000		279,000		—		—
Fidelity Securities Fund: Fidelity Small Cap Growth Fund (6)		157,000		157,000		—		—
Fidelity Securities Fund: Fidelity Small Cap Growth K6 Fund (6)		129,000		129,000		—		—
Fidelity Select Portfolios: Biotechnology Portfolio (6)		100,000		100,000		—		—
Avoro Life Sciences Fund LLC (7)		3,478,000		3,478,000		—		—
Entities affiliated with Viking Global Investors LP (8)		2,782,000		2,782,000		—		—
Entities associated with Venrock Healthcare Capital Partners (9)		2,295,000		2,295,000		—		—
Commodore Capital Master LP (10)		1,739,000		1,739,000		—		—
Entities affiliated with Janus Henderson (11)		1,739,000		1,739,000		—		—
Wellington Biomedical Innovation Master Investors (Cayman) II L.P. (12)		1,391,000		1,391,000		—		—
RA Capital Healthcare Fund, L.P. (13)		1,391,000		1,391,000		—		—
Entities associated with TCG Crossover Management (14)		1,391,000		1,391,000		—		—
ForGrowth III PA B.V. (15)		1,391,000		1,391,000		—		—
Biotech Growth N.V. (16)		973,000		973,000		—		—
Perceptive Life Sciences Master Fund, Ltd. (17)		973,000		973,000		—		—
Point72 Associates, LLC (18)		973,000		973,000		—		—
Entities Affiliated with Vestal Point Capital, LP (19)		973,000		973,000		—		—
Atlas Private Holdings (Cayman) Ltd. (20)		973,000		973,000		—		—
AH Bio Fund IV, L.P, as nominee (21)		973,000		973,000		—		—
CDK Associates, L.L.C. (22)		499,000		499,000		—		—
Spruce Street Aggregator L.P. (23)		443,000		443,000		—		—
Affinity Healthcare Fund, LP (24)		278,000		278,000		—		—
Entities associated with ADAR1 Capital Management, LLC (25)		278,000		278,000		—		—


Name of Selling Stockholders(1)	Common Stock Beneficially Owned Before Offering (2)		Common Stock that May Be Offered Pursuant to Prospectus		Common Stock Beneficially Owned After Offering (2)
					Number		Percentage (%)
Trails Edge Biotechnology Master Fund, LP (26)		278,000		278,000		—		—
Blackwell Partners LLC—Series A (27)		144,000		144,000		—		—
Kalehua Capital Partners LP (28)		139,000		139,000		—		—
Nantahala Capital Partners Limited Partnership (29)		101,000		101,000		—		—
Wedbush Healthcare Partners 2025 Fund, LLC (30)		69,000		69,000		—		—
NCP RFM LP (31)		33,000		33,000		—		—
Third Street Holdings, LLC (32)		31,000		31,000		—		—
Julianne Bruno (33)		137,032		137,032		—		—
Patrick Crutcher (34)		137,032		137,032		—		—
Michelle Pernice (35)		113,693		113,693		—		—
Justin DiMartino (36)		27,606		27,606		—		—

*	Less than 1%

(1)	To our knowledge, unless otherwise indicated, all persons named in the table above have sole voting and investment power with respect to their shares of Common Stock. Unless an address is provided below, the address for the holder is 75 State Street, Suite 100, Boston, MA 02109.

(2)

“Beneficial ownership” is a term broadly defined by the SEC in Rule 13d-3 under the Exchange Act, and includes more than the typical form of stock ownership, that is, stock held in the person’s name. The term also includes what is referred to as “indirect ownership,” meaning ownership of shares as to which a person has or shares investment power. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the beneficial ownership amounts assume the sale of all Common Stock that may be offered pursuant to this prospectus without taking into account certain limitations, including that a holder of Series B Preferred Stock and Series C Preferred Stock is prohibited from converting shares of Series B Preferred Stock and Series C Preferred Stock into shares of Common Stock (i) prior to the Conversion Approval, or (ii) if, as a result of such conversion, such holder, together with its affiliates, would beneficially own more than a specified percentage (established by the holder between 0.00% and 19.99%) (the “Beneficial Ownership Limitation”) of the total number of shares of Common Stock issued and outstanding immediately after giving effect to such conversion.

(3)

Consists of (i) 16,366,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 16,366 shares of Series B Preferred Stock held by Fairmount Healthcare Fund II LP (“Fund II”), (ii) 6,957,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 6,957 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Fund II and (iii) 3,478,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 3,478 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Fairmount Healthcare Co-Invest V L.P. (“Co-Invest”). Fairmount Funds Management LLC (“Fairmount Funds Management”) serves as investment manager for Fund II and Co-Invest and may be deemed a beneficial owner of any securities of the Company held by Fund II and Co-Invest. Fund II and Co-Invest have delegated to Fairmount Funds Management the sole power to vote and the sole power to dispose of all securities held in Fund II’s and Co-Invest’s portfolio. Because Fund II and Co-Invest have divested themselves of voting and investment power over the securities they hold and may not revoke that delegation on less than 61 days’ notice, Fund II and Co-Invest disclaim beneficial ownership of the securities they hold. As managers of Fairmount Funds Management, Peter Harwin and Tomas Kiselak may be deemed beneficial owners of any securities of the Company beneficially owned by Fairmount Funds Management. Fairmount Funds Management, Mr. Harwin and Mr. Kiselak disclaim beneficial ownership of securities held by Fund II and Co-Invest, except to the extent of their pecuniary interest therein. The address for the beneficial owners is 200 Barr Harbor Drive, Suite 400, West Conshohocken, PA 19428. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series B Preferred Stock and Series C Preferred Stock held by each of Fund II and Co-Invest are each subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 19.99%. At such time as Fairmount Funds Management and its affiliates beneficially own 9.0% or less of

the shares of common stock, the beneficial ownership limitation applicable to the shares of the Series B Preferred Stock and Series C Preferred Stock will automatically reduce to 9.99%.

(4)

Consists of (i) 120,473 shares of Common Stock and (ii) 1,925,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 1,925 shares of Series C Preferred Stock. Paragon is managed by its board of directors, consisting of Peter Harwin, Tomas Kiselak, and Keri Lantz. Paragon’s address is 221 Crescent St., Building 23, Suite 105, Waltham, MA 02453. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Paragon are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 4.99%.

(5)

Consists of (i) 120,473 shares of Common Stock and (ii) 1,925,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 1,925 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held. Paramora is managed by its board of managers, consisting of Mary Beth DeLena and Keri Lantz. Paramora’s address is 221 Crescent St., Building 23, Suite 105, Waltham, MA 02453. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Paramora are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 4.99%.

(6)

These funds and accounts are managed by direct or indirect subsidiaries of FMR LLC. Abigail P. Johnson is a Director, the Chairman and the Chief Executive Officer of FMR LLC. Members of the Johnson family, including Abigail P. Johnson, are the predominant owners, directly or through trusts, of Series B voting common shares of FMR LLC, representing 49% of the voting power of FMR LLC. The Johnson family group and all other Series B shareholders have entered into a shareholders’ voting agreement under which all Series B voting common shares will be voted in accordance with the majority vote of Series B voting common shares. Accordingly, through their ownership of voting common shares and the execution of the shareholders’ voting agreement, members of the Johnson family may be deemed, under the Investment Company Act of 1940, to form a controlling group with respect to FMR LLC. The address of these funds and accounts is 245 Summer Street, Boston, MA 02210. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by each of these funds and accounts are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 14.99%.

(7)

Consists of 3,478,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 3,478 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Avoro Life Sciences Fund LLC. Avoro Capital Advisors LLC (“Avoro”) is the investment advisor for Avoro Life Sciences Fund LLC. Behzad Aghazadeh serves as the portfolio manager and controlling person of Avoro and may be deemed to have investment discretion and voting power over the shares held by Avoro. Mr. Aghazadeh disclaims beneficial ownership of these shares, except to the extent of his pecuniary interest in such shares, if any. The address of Avoro Life Sciences Fund LLC is 110 Greene Street, Suite 800, New York, NY 10012. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Avoro Life Sciences Fund LLC are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 19.99%.

(8)

Consists of (i) 1,947,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 1,947 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Viking Global Opportunities Illiquid Investments Sub-Master LP (the “Opportunities Fund”) and (ii) 835,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 835 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Viking Global Opportunities Vintage IV (Aggregator) LP (the “Vintage IV Fund”). The Opportunities Fund has the authority to dispose of and vote the shares directly owned by it, which power may be exercised by its general partner, Viking Global Opportunities Portfolio GP LLC (“Opportunities GP”), and by Viking Global Investors LP (“VGI”), which provides managerial services to Opportunities Fund. O. Andreas Halvorsen, David C. Ott and Rose Shabet, as Executive Committee members of Viking Global Partners LLC (the general partner of VGI) and Viking Global Opportunities Parent GP LLC, the sole member of Viking Global Opportunities GP LLC (which is the sole member of Opportunities GP), have shared authority to direct the voting and disposition of investments beneficially owned by VGI and Opportunities GP. The Vintage IV Fund has the authority to dispose of and vote the shares directly owned by it, which power may be exercised by its general partner, Viking Global Opportunities Vintage IV Portfolio GP LLC (“Vintage IV GP”), and by VGI, which provides managerial services to the Vintage IV Fund. O. Andreas Halvorsen, David C. Ott and Rose Shabet, as Executive Committee members of Viking Global Partners LLC (the general partner of VGI) and Viking Global Opportunities Parent GP LLC, the sole member of Viking Global Opportunities Vintage IV GP LLC (which is the sole member of Vintage IV GP), have shared authority to direct the voting and disposition of

100

investments beneficially owned by VGI and Vintage IV GP. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by each of the Opportunities Fund and the Vintage IV Fund are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 9.90%.

(9)

Consists of (i) 1,767,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 1,767 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Venrock Healthcare Capital Partners EG, L.P. (“VHCP EG”), (ii) 480,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 480 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Venrock Healthcare Capital Partners III, L.P. (“VHCP III”) and (iii) 48,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 48 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by VHCP Co-Investment Holdings III, LLC (“VHCP III Co”). VHCP Management III, LLC (“VHCPM”) is the sole general partner of VHCP III and the sole manager of VHCP III Co. VHCP Management EG, LLC (“VHCPM EG”) is the sole general partner of VHCP EG. Dr. Bong Koh and Nimish Shah are the voting members of VHCPM and VHCPM EG. The address of each of these persons and entities is 7 Bryant Park, 23rd Floor, New York, NY 10018. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by each of VHCP EG, VHCP III and VHCP III Co are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 9.99%.

(10)

Consists of 1,739,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 1,739 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Commodore Capital Master LP. Commodore Capital LP is the investment manager to Commodore Capital Master LP and may be deemed to beneficially own the shares held by Commodore Capital Master LP. Michael Kramarz and Robert Egen Atkinson are the managing partners of Commodore Capital LP and exercise investment discretion with respect to these shares. Commodore Capital LP and Commodore Capital Master LP have shared voting and dispositive power with respect to these shares. The address of Commodore Capital LP and Commodore Capital Master LP is 444 Madison Avenue, 35th Floor, New York, NY 10022. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Commodore Capital Master LP are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 9.99%.

(11)

Consists of (i) 1,468,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 1,468 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Janus Henderson Biotech Innovation Master Fund Limited and (ii) 271,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 271 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Janus Henderson Biotech Innovation Master Fund II Limited. Such shares may be deemed to be beneficially owned by Janus Henderson Investors US LLC (“Janus”), an investment adviser registered under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, who acts as investment adviser for Janus Henderson Biotech Innovation Master Fund Limited and Janus Henderson Biotech Innovation Master Fund II Limited (the “Janus Funds”) and has the ability to make decisions with respect to the voting and deposition of the shares subject to the oversight of the board of directors of the Janus Funds. Under the terms of its management contract with the Janus Funds, Janus has overall responsibility for directing the investments of the Janus Funds in accordance with the Janus Funds’ investment objective, policies and limitations. The Janus Funds have one or more portfolio managers appointed by and serving at the pleasure of Janus who make decisions with respect to the disposition of the shares of Common Stock offered hereby. The address for Janus is 151 Detroit Street, Denver, CO 80206. The portfolio managers for the Janus Fund are Andrew Acker, Daniel S. Lyons and Agustin Mohedas. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by each of Janus Henderson Biotech Innovation Master Fund Limited and Janus Henderson Biotech Innovation Master Fund II Limited are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 19.99%.

(12)

Consists of 1,391,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 1,391 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Wellington Biomedical Innovation Master Investors (Cayman) II L.P. (the “Wellington Selling Stockholder”). Wellington Management Company LLP (“WMC”) has the power to vote and dispose of the securities pursuant to WMC’s capacity as investment advisor on behalf of the Wellington Selling Stockholder. WMC is a subsidiary of Wellington Management Group LLP (“WMG”). WMG is a Massachusetts limited liability partnership, privately held by 181 partners (as of July 1, 2025). There are no external entities with any ownership interest in the firm. No single partner owns or has the right to vote more than 5% of WMC’s capital. Additional information about WMC is available in its Form ADV filed with the SEC. The address of the Wellington entities is 280 Congress Street, Boston, MA 02210. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by the Wellington Selling Stockholder are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 9.99%.

101

(13)

Consists of 1,391,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 1,391 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by RA Capital Healthcare Fund, L.P. (“RACHF”). RA Capital Management, L.P. is the investment manager for RACHF. The general partner of RA Capital Management, L.P. is RA Capital Management GP, LLC, of which Peter Kolchinsky, Ph.D. and Rajeev Shah are the managing members. Each of RA Capital Management, L.P., RA Capital Management GP, LLC, Mr. Kolchinsky and Mr. Shah may be deemed to have voting and investment power over the securities held by RACHF. RA Capital Management, L.P., RA Capital Management GP, LLC, Mr. Kolchinsky and Mr. Shah disclaim beneficial ownership of such securities, except to the extent of any pecuniary interest therein. The principal business address of the persons and entities listed above is 200 Berkeley Street, 18th Floor, Boston, MA 02116. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by RACHF are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 9.99%.

(14)

Consists of (i) 696,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 696 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by TCG Crossover Fund II, LP (“TCGX II”) and (ii) 695,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 695 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by TCG Crossover Fund III, LP (“TCGX III”). TCG Crossover GP II, LLC (“TCGX II GP”) is the general partner of TCGX II and may be deemed to have voting, investment, and dispositive power with respect to the securities held by TCGX II and TCG Crossover GP III, LLC (“TCGX III GP”) is the general partner TCGX III and may be deemed to have voting, investment, and dispositive power with respect to the securities held by TCGX III. Chen Yu is the sole managing member of TCGX II GP and TCGX III GP and may be deemed to share voting, investment and dispositive power with respect to these securities. Each of TCGX II GP, TCGX III GP and Chen Yu disclaim beneficial ownership of these securities, except to the extent of their respective pecuniary interest in such securities. The principal business address for TCGX II, TCGX III, TCGX II GP, TCGX III GP and Chen Yu is c/o TCG Crossover Management, LLC, 245 Lytton Ave., Suite 350, Palo Alto, CA 94301. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by each of TCGX II and TCGX III are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 9.99%.

(15)

Consists of 1,391,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 1,391 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by ForGrowth III PA B.V. (“ForGrowth III”). Forbion Growth Opportunities Fund III Cooperatief U.A. (“Forbion Growth III COOP”), the sole shareholder of ForGrowth III, and Forbion Growth III Management B.V. (“Forbion Growth III”), as director of each of ForGrowth III and Forbion Growth III COOP, may be deemed to have voting and investment power over the securities held directly by ForGrowth III. The address of the principal business and principal office of each of the entities referenced in this footnote is c/o Forbion Capital Partners, Gooimeer 2-35, 1411 DC Naarden, The Netherlands. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by ForGrowth III are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 9.99%.

(16)

Consists of 973,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 973 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Biotech Growth N.V. Biotech Growth N.V. is a wholly owned subsidiary of BB Biotech AG, a publicly held investment company, the shares of which are traded on the Swiss and German stock exchanges. The address of the principal business and principal office of each of the entities referenced in this footnote is Ara Hill Top Building, Unit A-5, Pletterijweg Oost 1, Willemstad, Curaçao, Dutch Caribbean. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Biotech Growth N.V. are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 9.99%.

(17)

Consists of 973,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 973 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Perceptive Life Sciences Master Fund, Ltd (“Perceptive Fund”). Perceptive Advisors LLC (“Perceptive Advisors”) is the investment advisor of Perceptive Fund and may be deemed to have beneficial ownership of the shares beneficially owned thereby. Joseph Edelman is the controlling person of Perceptive Advisors and, accordingly, may be deemed to have beneficial ownership of the shares beneficially owned by each of Perceptive Fund and Perceptive Advisors. Perceptive Advisors, Perceptive Fund and Mr. Edelman disclaim beneficial ownership of all such shares except to the extent of his or its pecuniary interest therein. The address of Perceptive is 51 Astor Place, 10th Floor, New York, NY 10003. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Perceptive Fund are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 9.99%.

102

(18)

Consists of 973,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 973 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Point72 Associates, LLC (“Point72 Associates”). Point72 Asset Management, L.P. maintains investment and voting power with respect to the securities held by certain investment funds it manages, including Point72 Associates. Point72 Capital Advisors, Inc. is the general partner of Point72 Asset Management, L.P. Mr. Steven A. Cohen controls each of Point72 Asset Management, L.P. and Point72 Capital Advisors, Inc. By reason of the provisions of Rule 13d-3 of the Exchange Act, each of Point72 Asset Management, L.P., Point72 Capital Advisors, Inc., and Mr. Cohen may be deemed to beneficially own the securities held by Point72 Associates reflected herein. Each of Point72 Asset Management, L.P., Point72 Capital Advisors, Inc., and Mr. Cohen disclaims beneficial ownership of any such securities. The address for Point72 Associates is c/o Point72 Asset Management, L.P., 72 Cummings Point Road, Stamford, CT 06902. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Point72 Associates are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 9.99%.

(19)

Consists of (i) 494,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 494 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Vestal Point Master Fund, LP (“Vestal Point Master Fund”) and (ii) 479,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 479 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by accounts separately managed by Vestal Point Capital, LP (“Vestal Point Capital”). The sole general partner of Vestal Point Master Fund, LP is Vestal Point Partners GP, LLC. The managing member of Vestal Point Partners GP, LLC is Ryan Wilder. The sole general partner of Vestal Point Capital, LP is Vestal Point Capital, LLC. The managing member of Vestal Point Capital, LLC is Mr. Wilder. As a result, Mr. Wilder may be deemed to have voting and investment power over the securities held by Vestal Point Master Fund, LP and the accounts separately managed by Vestal Point Capital, LP. Mr. Wilder disclaims beneficial ownership of such securities, except to the extent of his pecuniary interest therein. The address of the foregoing entities and Mr. Wilder is c/o Vestal Point Capital, LP, 632 Broadway, Suite 602, New York, NY 10012. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by each of Vestal Point Master Fund and the accounts separately managed by Vestal Point Capital are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 9.99%.

(20)

Consists of 973,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 973 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Atlas Private Holdings (Cayman) Ltd. (“APHC”). Balyasny Asset Management L.P. (“BAM”) is the investment manager of APHC. Dmitry Balyasny indirectly controls the general partner of BAM and shall be deemed to have voting and investment control over the shares held by APHC and may be deemed to beneficially own the shares beneficially owned by APHC. The business address of APHC is c/o Maples Corporate Services Limited, P.O. Box 309, Ugland House, George Town, Grand Cayman KY1-1104, Cayman Islands, and the business address of BAM and Dmitry Balyasny is 444 W. Lake Street, 50th Floor, Chicago, IL 60606. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by APHC are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 9.99%.

(21)

Consists of 973,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 973 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by AH Bio Fund IV, L.P. (“AH Bio Fund IV”), for itself and as nominee for AH Bio Fund IV-B, L.P., AH 2022 Annual Fund, L.P., AH 2022 Annual Fund-B, L.P., AH 2022 Annual Fund-QC, L.P. and CLF Partners III, LP. AH Equity Partners Bio IV, L.L.C. (“AH EP Bio IV”) is the general partner of AH Bio Fund IV and may be deemed to have sole voting and dispositive power over the shares held by AH Bio Fund IV for itself and as nominee. The managing members of AH EP Bio IV are Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz, and each of them may be deemed to hold shared voting and dispositive power over the shares held by AH Bio Fund IV for itself and as nominee. Shares held by AH Bio Fund IV include shares that may be subsequently sold by each of the entities for which AH Bio IV holds as nominee, these entities’ respective general and limited partners, Mr. Andreessen and Mr. Horowitz following in-kind distributions of shares by these entities. The address for the persons and entities set forth herein is 2865 Sand Hill Road, Suite 101, Menlo Park, CA 94025. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by AH Bio Fund IV for itself and as nominee are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 4.99%.

(22)	Consists of 499,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 499 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by CDK Associates, LLC (“CDK”). Bruce Kovner has voting and/or dispositive power

103

over the holdings of CDK. The address of CDK is c/o CAM Capital 731 Alexander Road, Bldg 2, Suite 500, Princeton, NJ 08540. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by CDK are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 4.99%.

(23)

Consists of 443,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 443 shares Series C Preferred Stock held by Spruce Street Aggregator L.P. (“Spruce Street Fund”). Blackstone Alternative Asset Management Associates LLC is the general partner of Spruce Street Fund. Blackstone Holdings II L.P. is the sole member of Blackstone Alternative Asset Management Associates LLC. Blackstone Holdings I/II GP L.L.C. is the general partner of Blackstone Holdings II L.P. Blackstone Inc. is the sole member of Blackstone Holdings I/II GP L.L.C. Blackstone Group Management L.L.C. is the sole holder of the Series II preferred stock of Blackstone Inc. Blackstone Group Management L.L.C. is wholly owned by its senior managing directors and controlled by its founder, Stephen A. Schwarzman. Each of such Blackstone entities and Mr. Schwarzman may be deemed to beneficially own the securities beneficially owned by Spruce Street Fund directly or indirectly controlled by it or him, but each (other than Spruce Street Fund to the extent of its direct holdings) disclaims beneficial ownership of such securities. The address of each of the entities listed is c/o Blackstone Inc., 345 Park Avenue, New York, New York 10154. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Spruce Street Fund are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 4.99%.

(24)

Consists of 278,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 278 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Affinity Healthcare Fund, LP (the “Fund”). Affinity Asset Advisors, LLC (the “Advisor”) is the investment manager of the Fund and exercises investment discretion with regard to the shares of Common Stock owned by the Fund. The Fund and the Advisor have the shared power to vote or to direct the vote and to dispose or direct the disposition of such shares of Common Stock owned by the Fund. The Advisor may be deemed to be the beneficial owner of such shares of Common Stock owned by the Fund by virtue of its position as investment manager of the Fund. The principal business address of each of the Fund and the Advisor is 450 Park Avenue, Suite 1403, New York, NY 10022. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by the Fund are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 9.99%.

(25)

Consists of (i) 234,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 234 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by ADAR1 Partners, LP (“ADAR1”) and (ii) 44,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 44 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Spearhead Insurance Solutions, LLC—Series ADAR1 (“Spearhead”). ADAR1 Capital Management, LLC acts as an investment adviser to ADAR1, acts as sub-advisor to Spearhead, and manages investment and trading accounts of ADAR1 and Spearhead. ADAR1 Capital Management GP, LLC (“ADAR1 General Partner”) acts as the general partner of ADAR1. ADAR1 Capital Management may be deemed to indirectly beneficially own securities held by ADAR1 and Spearhead, and ADAR1 General Partner may be deemed to indirectly beneficially own securities held by ADAR1. Mr. Daniel Schneeberger is the Manager of ADAR1 Capital Management, LLC and ADAR1 General Partner. Mr. Schneeberger may be deemed to indirectly beneficially own securities held by ADAR1. Mr. Schneeberger disclaims beneficial ownership of such securities, except to the extent of his pecuniary interest therein. The address of ADAR1 Capital Management, LLC is 3503 Wild Cherry Drive, Building 9, Austin, Texas 78738. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by each of ADAR1 and Spearhead Insurance Solutions, LLC—Series ADAR1 are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 9.99%.

(26)

Consists of 278,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 278 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Trails Edge Biotechnology Master Fund, LP (“Trails Edge Biotechnology”). Trails Edge Capital Partners, LP (“Trails Edge Capital”), as the investment manager to Trails Edge Biotechnology, may be deemed to beneficially own these securities. Mr. Yehudai, as the Chief Investment Officer of Trails Edge Capital, exercises voting and investment discretion with respect to these securities and as such may be deemed to beneficially own such securities. The address of these funds and persons is 3455 Peachtree Road NE, Atlanta, GA 30326. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Trails Edge Biotechnology are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 9.99%.

104

(27)

Consists of 144,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 144 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Blackwell Partners LLC—Series A (“Blackwell”). Each of Wilmot B. Harkey and Daniel Mack may be deemed to be beneficial owners of securities held by Blackwell as the managing members of Nantahala Capital Management, LLC, which is the general partner or investment manager of Blackwell. The address for Blackwell is 130 Main St. 2nd Floor, New Canaan, Connecticut 06840. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Blackwell are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 9.99%.

(28)

Consists of 139,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 139 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Kalehua Capital Partners LP. Kalehua Capital Partners LP is a Delaware limited partnership whose general partner is Kalehua Capital Management LLC. Tai-Li Chang serves as the Managing Member of Kalehua Capital Management LLC and is the Initial Limited Partner of Kalehua Capital Partners LP. The address of this person and fund is 3819 Maple Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75219. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Kalehua Capital Partners LP are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 4.99%.

(29)

Consists of 101,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 101 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Nantahala Capital Partners Limited Partnership (“Nantahala”). Each of Wilmot B. Harkey and Daniel Mack may be deemed to be beneficial owners of securities held by Nantahala as the managing members of Nantahala Capital Management, LLC, which is the general partner or investment manager of Nantahala. The address for Nantahala is 130 Main St. 2nd Floor, New Canaan, Connecticut 06840. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Blackwell are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 9.99%.

(30)

Consists of 69,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 69 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Wedbush Healthcare Partners 2025 Fund, LLC. The address for Wedbush Healthcare Partners 2025 Fund, LLC is 225 S Lake Ave, Penthouse, Pasadena, CA, 91101. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Wedbush Healthcare Partners 2025 Fund, LLC are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 9.90%.

(31)

Consists of 33,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 33 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by NCP RFM LP (“NCP”). Each of Wilmot B. Harkey and Daniel Mack may be deemed to be beneficial owners of securities held by NCP as the managing members of Nantahala Capital Management, LLC, which is the general partner or investment manager of NCP. The address for NCP is 130 Main St. 2nd Floor, New Canaan, Connecticut 06840. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by each of NCP are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 9.99%.

(32)

Consists of 31,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 31 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Third Street Holdings, LLC (“Third Street”). Peter P. D’Angelo has voting and/or dispositive power over the holdings of Third Street. The address of Third Street is c/o Pelican Management, LLC 731 Alexander Road, Bldg 2, Suite 500, Princeton, NJ 08540. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Third Street are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 4.99%.

(33)

Consists of (i) 8,032 shares of Common Stock and (ii) 129,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 129 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Julianne Bruno. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Julianne Bruno are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 4.99%.

(34)

Consists of (i) 8,032 shares of Common Stock and (ii) 129,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 129 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Patrick Crutcher. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Patrick Crutcher are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 4.99%.

(35)

Consists of (i) 6,693 shares of Common Stock and (ii) 107,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 107 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Michelle Pernice. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Michelle Pernice are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 4.99%.

105

(36)

Consists of (i) 1,606 shares of Common Stock and (ii) 26,000 shares of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of 107 shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Justin DiMartino. The shares of Common Stock issuable upon conversion of the shares of Series C Preferred Stock held by Justin DiMartino are subject to a Beneficial Ownership Limitation of 4.99%.

Relationship with the Selling Stockholders

In addition to the Securities Purchase Agreement, on November 10, 2025, in connection with the PIPE, we entered into a registration rights agreement (the “RRA”) with the Investors. Julianne Bruno serves on our board of directors. Wedbush PacGrow served as lead financial advisor to Damora with respect to the Asset Acquisition. We consider Paragon, Paramora, and Fairmount to be related parties. See the section titled “Prospectus Summary—Our Relationship with Fairmount, Paragon and Paramora” for more information.

Registration Rights Agreement

Pursuant to the terms of our RRA, we agreed to prepare and file with the SEC a registration statement that permits the resale or other disposition of the Investors’ shares of Common Stock issued upon conversion of the Series C Preferred Stock issued to such Investors pursuant to the Securities Purchase Agreement and, subject to certain exceptions, use commercially reasonable efforts to keep the registration statement of which this prospectus forms a part effective under the Securities Act for so long as such securities registered for resale thereunder retain their character as Registrable Securities (as defined in the RRA). We are filing this prospectus to satisfy our obligations under the RRA, as well as register for resale or other disposition the other Selling Stockholders’ shares of Common Stock issued upon conversion of the Series B Preferred Stock and Series C Preferred Stock issued to such Selling Stockholders pursuant to the Acquisition Agreement.

We have also agreed, among other things, to indemnify the Investors and each of their respective officers, directors, members, employees, partners, managers, stockholders, affiliates, investment advisors and agents, each person who controls any such Investor and the officers, directors, members, employees, partners, managers, stockholders, affiliates, investment advisors and agents of each such controlling person from certain liabilities and pay all fees and expenses (excluding any legal fees of the selling holder(s), and any underwriting discounts and selling commissions) incident to our obligations under the RRA.

106

PLAN OF DISTRIBUTION

We are registering the Resale Shares issued to the Selling Stockholders to permit the sale, transfer or other disposition of these shares by the Selling Stockholders or their donees, pledgees, transferees or other successors-in-interest of Common Stock or interests in shares of Common Stock received after the date of this prospectus from a Selling Stockholder as a gift, pledge, partnership distribution or other transfer. We will, or will procure to, bear all fees and expenses incident to our obligation to register the Resale Shares.

The Selling Stockholders may sell all or a portion of the Resale Shares beneficially owned by them and offered hereby from time to time, and in the case of the Private Placement Conversion Shares and Merger Conversion Shares, may only be offered after such shares are converted to Common Stock pursuant to the terms of the Series B Certificate of Designation and Series C Certificate of Designation, as applicable, directly or through one or more underwriters, broker-dealers or agents. The Resale Shares may be sold on any stock exchange, market or trading facility on which the shares are traded or in private transactions. These dispositions may be at fixed prices, at prevailing market prices at the time of sale, at prices related to the prevailing market price, at varying prices determined at the time of sale, or at negotiated prices. These sales may be effected in transactions, which may involve crosses or block transactions. The Selling Stockholders may use any one or more of the following methods when disposing of shares or interests therein:

•

distributions to members, partners, stockholders or other equityholders of the Selling Stockholders;

•

ordinary brokerage transactions and transactions in which the broker-dealer solicits purchasers;

•

block trades in which the broker-dealer will attempt to sell the shares as agent, but may position and resell a portion of the block as principal to facilitate the transaction;

•

purchases by a broker-dealer as principal and resale by the broker-dealer for its account;

•

an exchange distribution in accordance with the rules of the applicable exchange;

•

privately negotiated transactions;

•

short sales and settlement of short sales entered into after the effective date of the registration statement of which this prospectus is a part;

•

through the writing or settlement of options or other hedging transactions, whether through an options exchange or otherwise;

•

broker-dealers may agree with the Selling Stockholders to sell a specified number of such shares at a stipulated price per share;

•

a combination of any such methods of sale; and

•

any other method permitted pursuant to applicable law.

The Selling Stockholders may, from time to time, pledge or grant a security interest in some or all of the shares of Common Stock owned by them and, if they default in the performance of their secured obligations, the pledgees or secured parties may offer and sell the shares of Common Stock, from time to time, under this prospectus, or under an amendment to this prospectus under Rule 424(b)(3) or other applicable provision of the Securities Act, amending the list of Selling Stockholders to include the pledgee, transferee or other successors in interest as Selling Stockholders under this prospectus. The Selling Stockholders also may transfer the shares of Common Stock in other circumstances, in which case the transferees, pledgees or other successors in interest will be the Selling Stockholders for purposes of this prospectus.

In connection with the sale of Common Stock or interests therein, the Selling Stockholders may enter into hedging transactions with broker-dealers or other financial institutions, which may in turn engage in short sales of Common Stock in the course of hedging the positions they assume. The Selling Stockholders may also sell shares of Common Stock short and deliver these securities to close out their short positions, or loan or pledge shares of Common Stock to broker-dealers that in turn may sell these securities. The Selling Stockholders may

107

also enter into option or other transactions with broker-dealers or other financial institutions or the creation of one or more derivative securities which require the delivery to such broker-dealer or other financial institution of shares offered by this prospectus, which shares such broker-dealer or other financial institution may resell pursuant to this prospectus (as supplemented or amended to reflect such transaction).

The aggregate proceeds to the Selling Stockholders from the sale of shares of Common Stock offered by them will be the purchase price of the Common Stock less discounts or commissions, if any. Each of the Selling Stockholders reserves the right to accept and, together with their agents from time to time, to reject, in whole or in part, any proposed purchase of Common Stock to be made directly or through agents. We will not receive any of the proceeds from this offering.

The Selling Stockholders also may resell all or a portion of the shares in open market transactions in reliance upon Rule 144 under the Securities Act (“Rule 144”), provided that they meet the criteria and conform to the requirements of that rule, or another available exemption from the registration requirements under the Securities Act.

The Selling Stockholders and any underwriters, broker-dealers or agents that participate in the sale of shares of Common Stock or interests therein may be “underwriters” within the meaning of Section 2(a)(11) of the Securities Act (it being understood that the Selling Stockholders shall not be deemed to be underwriters solely as a result of their participation in this offering). Any discounts, commissions, concessions or profit they earn on any resale of the shares may be underwriting discounts and commissions under the Securities Act. Selling stockholders who are “underwriters” within the meaning of Section 2(a)(11) of the Securities Act will be subject to the prospectus delivery requirements of the Securities Act.

To the extent required, the shares of Common Stock to be sold, the names of the Selling Stockholders, the respective purchase prices and public offering prices, the names of any agent, dealer or underwriter, and any applicable commissions or discounts with respect to a particular offer will be set forth in an accompanying prospectus supplement or, if appropriate, a post-effective amendment to the registration statement that includes this prospectus.

In order to comply with the securities laws of some states, if applicable, the Common Stock may be sold in these jurisdictions only through registered or licensed brokers or dealers. In addition, in some states the Common Stock may not be sold unless it has been registered or qualified for sale or an exemption from registration or qualification requirements is available and is complied with. We have advised the Selling Stockholders that the anti-manipulation rules of Regulation M under the Exchange Act may apply to sales of shares in the market and to the activities of the Selling Stockholders and their affiliates. In addition, to the extent applicable, we will make copies of this prospectus (as it may be supplemented or amended from time to time) available to the Selling Stockholders for the purpose of satisfying the prospectus delivery requirements of the Securities Act. The Selling Stockholders may indemnify any broker-dealer that participates in transactions involving the sale of the shares against certain liabilities, including liabilities arising under the Securities Act.

Pursuant to the RRA, we have agreed to indemnify the Investors against liabilities, including liabilities under the Securities Act and state securities laws, relating to the registration of the shares offered by this prospectus.

Pursuant to the RRA, we have agreed with the Investors to use commercially reasonable efforts to cause the registration statement of which this prospectus constitutes a part to become effective and to remain continuously effective until the earlier of: (i) the date on which the Investors shall have resold or otherwise disposed of all the shares covered by this prospectus and (ii) the date on which the shares covered by this prospectus no longer constitute “Registrable Securities” as such term is defined in the RRA, such that they may be resold by the Investors without registration and without regard to any volume or manner-of-sale limitations and without current public information pursuant to Rule 144 or any other rule of similar effect.

There can be no assurance that any Selling Stockholder will sell any or all of the Resale Shares registered pursuant to the registration statement of which this prospectus forms a part.

108

DESCRIPTION OF CAPITAL STOCK

Our authorized capital stock consists of 300,000,000 shares of Common Stock, par value $0.00001 per share, and 10,000,000 shares of preferred stock, of which 200 shares have been designated as Series A Preferred Stock, par value $0.00001 per share, 16,366 shares have been designated as Series B Preferred Stock, par value $0.00001 per share, and 43,882 shares have been designated as Series C Preferred Stock, par value $0.00001 per share.

Common Stock

Holders of Common Stock are entitled to one vote for each share of Common Stock held of record for the election of directors and on all matters submitted to a vote of stockholders. Except as described under “Anti-takeover Effects of Delaware Law and Provisions of our Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws” below, a majority vote of the holders of Common Stock is generally required to take action under our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, as amended (the “Certificate of Incorporation”), and amended and restated by-laws, as amended (the “Bylaws”). Holders of Common Stock are entitled to receive dividends ratably, if any, as may be declared by our board of directors out of legally available funds, subject to any preferential dividend rights of any preferred stock then outstanding. Upon our dissolution, liquidation or winding up, holders of Common Stock are entitled to share ratably in our net assets legally available after the payment of all our debts and other liabilities, subject to the preferential rights of any preferred stock then outstanding. Holders of Common Stock have no preemptive, subscription, redemption or conversion rights and no sinking fund provisions are applicable to Common Stock. The rights, preferences and privileges of holders of Common Stock are subject to, and may be adversely affected by, the rights of the holders of shares of any series of preferred stock that we have designated or may designate and issue in the future.

As of December 1, 2025, 1,595,161 shares of Common Stock were outstanding and held by 20 holders of record.

Preferred Stock

Our board of directors has the authority, without action by the stockholders, to designate and issue up to an aggregate of 10,000,000 shares of preferred stock in one or more series. Our board of directors can designate the rights, preferences and privileges of the shares of each series and any of its qualifications, limitations or restrictions. Our board of directors may authorize the issuance of preferred stock with voting or conversion rights that could adversely affect the voting power or other rights of the holders of Common Stock. The issuance of preferred stock, while providing flexibility in connection with possible future financings and acquisitions and other corporate purposes could, under certain circumstances, have the effect of restricting dividends on Common Stock, diluting the voting power of Common Stock, impairing the liquidation rights of Common Stock, or delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control of us, which might harm the market price of our Common Stock. See also “—Anti-Takeover Effects of Delaware Law and Provisions of Our Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws—Provisions of our Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws—Undesignated preferred stock” below.

Our board of directors will make any determination to issue such shares of preferred stock based on its judgment as to our best interests and the best interests of our stockholders.

Series A Preferred Stock

As of December 1, 2025, our board of directors had authorized the issuance of up to 200 shares of Series A non-voting convertible preferred stock (the “Series A Preferred Stock”), of which 158.361 shares were issued and outstanding. The terms of the Series A Preferred Stock are as set forth in the Certificate of Designation of Preferences, Rights and Limitations of Series A Non-Voting Convertible Preferred Stock (the “Series A Certificate of Designation”), attached as Exhibit 3.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on October 7, 2024. On June 18, 2025, our stockholders approved, for purposes of the Nasdaq Stock Market Rules, the issuance of shares of Common Stock upon conversion of the Series A Preferred Stock (the “Series A

109

Stockholder Approval”). On the third business day following the Series A Stockholder Approval, certain shares of Series A Preferred Stock were, subject to certain beneficial ownership limitations, automatically converted into 1,000 shares of Common Stock upon the conversion terms set forth in the Series A Certificate of Designation. Each share of Series A Preferred Stock is convertible into 1,000 shares of Common Stock at the election of the holder of such Series A Preferred Stock, subject to certain beneficial ownership limitations. Except as required by law, the Series A Preferred Stock shall have no voting rights, provided that we may not, without the affirmative vote or written consent of the holders of majority of then outstanding Series A Preferred Stock, among other things, alter or change adversely the power, preferences or rights given to the Series A Preferred Stock, amend the Series A Certificate of Designation, issue additional shares of Series A Preferred Stock or fail to comply with certain provisions of the Asset Purchase Agreement between us and Bridge Medicines LLC, dated October 7, 2024.

Series B Preferred Stock

As of December 1, 2025, our board of directors had authorized the issuance of up to 16,366 shares of Series B Preferred Stock, of which 16,366 shares were issued and outstanding. The terms of the Series B Preferred Stock are as set forth in the Certificate of Designation of Series B Non-Voting Convertible Preferred Stock (the “Series B Certificate of Designation”), attached as Exhibit 3.1 to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on November 10, 2025. Holders of Series B Preferred Stock are entitled to receive dividends on shares of Series B Preferred Stock equal to, on an as-if-converted-to-common-stock basis, and in the same form as dividends actually paid on shares of Common Stock. Except as provided in the Series B Certificate of Designation or as otherwise required by law, the Series B Preferred Stock does not have voting rights. However, as long as any shares of Series B Preferred Stock are outstanding, we will not, without the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the then outstanding shares of the Series B Preferred Stock: (a) alter or change adversely the powers, preferences or rights given to the Series B Preferred Stock, or alter or amend the Series B Certificate of Designation, amend or repeal any provision of, or add any provision to, the Certificate of Incorporation or Bylaws, or file any articles of amendment, certificate of designations, preferences, limitations and relative rights of any series of Preferred Stock, if such action would adversely alter or change the preferences, rights, privileges or powers of, or restrictions provided for the benefit of the Series B Preferred Stock, regardless of whether any of the foregoing actions will be by means of amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation or by merger, consolidation, recapitalization, reclassification, conversion or otherwise, (b) issue further shares of Series B Preferred Stock or increase or decrease (other than by conversion) the number of authorized shares of Series B Preferred Stock, (c) or at any time while at least 30% of the originally issued Series B Preferred Stock remains issued and outstanding, (i) consummate (x) any Fundamental Transaction (as defined in the Series B Certificate of Designation) or (y) any merger or consolidation of the Company with or into another entity or any stock sale to, or other business combination in which the stockholders of the Company immediately before such transaction do not hold at least a majority of the capital stock of the Company immediately after such transaction, (ii) increase the size of the board of directors of the Company, (iii) adopt, amend or repeal any written delegation of authority policy, corporate authority matrix or similar document, framework or schedule unless such adoption, amendment or repeal has been approved by the unanimous vote of the board of directors of the Company, or (iv) retain or replace the Company’s registered independent public accounting firm, independent compensation consultant or corporate counsel, or (d) enter into any agreement with respect to any of the foregoing. The Series B Preferred Stock does not have a preference upon any liquidation, dissolution or winding-up of the Company.

Following the Conversion Approval, each share of Series B Preferred Stock may, at the option of the holder, be converted into 1,000 shares of Common Stock, subject to certain limitations, including that a holder of Series B Preferred Stock is prohibited from converting shares of Series B Preferred Stock into shares of Common Stock if, as a result of such conversion, such holder, together with its affiliates, would beneficially own more than a specified percentage (established by the holder between 0% and 19.99%) of the total number of shares of Common Stock issued and outstanding immediately after giving effect to such conversion.

110

Series C Preferred Stock

As of December 1, 2025, our board of directors had authorized the issuance of up to 43,882 shares of Series C Preferred Stock, of which 43,882 shares were issued and outstanding. The terms of the Series C Preferred Stock are as set forth in the Certificate of Designation of Series C Non-Voting Convertible Preferred Stock (the “Series C Certificate of Designation”), attached as Exhibit 3.2 to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on November 10, 2025, as corrected by Exhibit 3.3 to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on December 9, 2025. Holders of Series C Preferred Stock are entitled to receive dividends on shares of Series C Preferred Stock equal to, on an as-if-converted-to-common-stock basis, and in the same form as dividends actually paid on shares of Common Stock. Except as provided in the Series C Certificate of Designation or as otherwise required by law, the Series C Preferred Stock does not have voting rights. However, as long as any shares of Series C Preferred Stock are outstanding, we will not, without the affirmative vote of the holders of a majority of the then outstanding shares of the Series C Preferred Stock: (a) alter or change adversely the powers, preferences or rights given to the Series C Preferred Stock, or alter or amend the Series C Certificate of Designation, amend or repeal any provision of, or add any provision to, the Certificate of Incorporation or Bylaws, or file any articles of amendment, certificate of designations, preferences, limitations and relative rights of any series of Preferred Stock, if such action would adversely alter or change the preferences, rights, privileges or powers of, or restrictions provided for the benefit of the Series C Preferred Stock, regardless of whether any of the foregoing actions will be by means of amendment to the Certificate of Incorporation or by merger, consolidation, recapitalization, reclassification, conversion or otherwise, (b) issue further shares of Series C Preferred Stock or increase or decrease (other than by conversion) the number of authorized shares of Series C Preferred Stock, or (c) enter into any agreement with respect to any of the foregoing. The Series C Preferred Stock does not have a preference upon any liquidation, dissolution or winding-up of the Company.

On the third business day following the Conversion Approval, each share of Series C Preferred Stock will automatically convert into 1,000 shares of Common Stock, subject to certain limitations, including that a holder of Series C Preferred Stock is prohibited from converting shares of Series C Preferred Stock into shares of Common Stock if, as a result of such conversion, such holder, together with its affiliates, would beneficially own more than a specified percentage (established by the holder between 0% and 19.99%) of the total number of shares of Common Stock issued and outstanding immediately after giving effect to such conversion.

We have no current plan to issue any additional shares of preferred stock.

Registration Rights

Certain of the holders of our Series C Preferred Stock are entitled to certain rights with respect to the registration of such securities as further provided under the heading “Selling Stockholders—Registration Rights Agreement.”

Anti-Takeover Effects of Delaware Law and Provisions of Our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws

Certain provisions of the DGCL, and of our Certificate of Incorporation could have the effect of delaying, deferring or discouraging another party from acquiring control of us. These provisions, which are summarized below, are expected to discourage certain types of coercive takeover practices and inadequate takeover bids and, as a consequence, they might also inhibit temporary fluctuations in the market price of our Common Stock that often result from actual or rumored hostile takeover attempts. These provisions are also designed in part to encourage anyone seeking to acquire control of us to first negotiate with our board of directors. These provisions might also have the effect of preventing changes in our board of directors or management. It is possible that these provisions could make it more difficult to accomplish transactions that stockholders might otherwise deem to be in their best interests. However, we believe that the advantages gained by protecting our ability to negotiate with any unsolicited and potentially unfriendly acquirer outweigh the disadvantages of discouraging such proposals, including those priced above the then-current market value of our Common Stock, because, among other reasons, the negotiation of such proposals could improve their terms.

111

Delaware takeover statute

We are subject to the provisions of Section 203 of the DGCL (“Section 203”). In general, Section 203 prohibits a publicly held Delaware corporation from engaging in a “business combination” with an “interested stockholder” for a three-year period following the time that this stockholder becomes an interested stockholder, unless the business combination is approved in a prescribed manner. Under Section 203, a business combination between a corporation and an interested stockholder is prohibited unless it satisfies one of the following conditions:

•

before the stockholder became interested, our board of directors approved either the business combination or the transaction which resulted in the stockholder becoming an interested stockholder;

•

upon consummation of the transaction which resulted in the stockholder becoming an interested stockholder, the interested stockholder owned at least 85% of the voting stock of the corporation outstanding at the time the transaction commenced, excluding for purposes of determining the voting stock outstanding, shares owned by persons who are directors and also officers, and employee stock plans, in some instances, but not the outstanding voting stock owned by the interested stockholder; or

•

at or after the time the stockholder became interested, the business combination was approved by our board of directors and authorized at an annual or special meeting of the stockholders by the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of the outstanding voting stock which is not owned by the interested stockholder.

Section 203 defines a business combination to include:

•

any merger or consolidation involving the corporation and the interested stockholder;

•

any sale, transfer, lease, pledge, exchange, mortgage or other disposition involving the interested stockholder of 10% or more of the assets of the corporation;

•

subject to exceptions, any transaction that results in the issuance or transfer by the corporation of any stock of the corporation to the interested stockholder;

•

subject to exceptions, any transaction involving the corporation that has the effect of increasing the proportionate share of the stock of any class or series of the corporation beneficially owned by the interested stockholder; or

•

the receipt by the interested stockholder of the benefit of any loans, advances, guarantees, pledges or other financial benefits provided by or through the corporation.

In general, Section 203 defines an interested stockholder as any entity or person beneficially owning 15% or more of the outstanding voting stock of the corporation and any entity or person affiliated with or controlling or controlled by the entity or person.

Provisions of our Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws

Our Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws include a number of provisions that may have the effect of delaying, deferring or discouraging another party from acquiring control of us and encouraging persons considering unsolicited tender offers or other unilateral takeover proposals to negotiate with our board of directors rather than pursue non-negotiated takeover attempts. These provisions include the items described below.

•

Board composition and filling vacancies. In accordance with our Certificate of Incorporation, our board is divided into three classes serving staggered three-year terms, with one class being elected each year. Our Certificate of Incorporation also provides that directors may be removed only for cause and then only by the affirmative vote of the holders of not less than two thirds or more of the shares then entitled to vote at an election of directors. Furthermore, any vacancy on our board of directors, however occurring, including a vacancy resulting from an increase in the size of our board, may only be filled by the affirmative vote of a majority of our directors then in office even if less than a quorum.

112

•

No written consent of stockholders. Our Certificate of Incorporation provides that all stockholder actions are required to be taken by a vote of the stockholders at an annual or special meeting, and that stockholders may not take any action by written consent in lieu of a meeting. This limit may lengthen the amount of time required to take stockholder actions and would prevent the amendment of our Bylaws or removal of directors by our stockholder without holding a meeting of stockholders.

•

Meetings of stockholders. Our Bylaws provide that only a majority of the members of our board of directors then in office may call special meetings of stockholders and only those matters set forth in the notice of the special meeting may be considered or acted upon at a special meeting of stockholders. Our Bylaws limit the business that may be conducted at an annual meeting of stockholders to those matters properly brought before the meeting.

•

Advance notice requirements. Our Bylaws establish advance notice procedures with regard to stockholder proposals relating to the nomination of candidates for election as directors or new business to be brought before meetings of our stockholders. These procedures provide that notice of stockholder proposals must be timely given in writing to our corporate secretary prior to the meeting at which the action is to be taken. Generally, to be timely, notice must be received at our principal executive offices not less than 90 days or more than 120 days prior to the first anniversary date of the annual meeting for the preceding year. The notice must contain certain information specified in our Bylaws.

•

Amendment to Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws. As required by the DGCL, any amendment of our Certificate of Incorporation must first be approved by a majority of our board of directors, and if required by law or our Certificate of Incorporation, must thereafter be approved by a majority of the outstanding shares entitled to vote on the amendment, and a majority of the outstanding shares of each class entitled to vote thereon as a class, except that the amendment of the provisions relating to stockholder action, directors, limitation of liability and the amendment of our Certificate of Incorporation must be approved by not less than two thirds of the outstanding shares entitled to vote on the amendment, and not less than two-thirds of the outstanding shares of each class entitled to vote thereon as a class. Our Bylaws may be amended by the affirmative vote of a majority vote of the directors then in office, subject to any limitations set forth in the Bylaws; and may also be amended by the affirmative vote of at least two thirds of the outstanding shares entitled to vote on the amendment, voting together as a single class.

•

Undesignated preferred stock. Our Certificate of Incorporation provides for 10,000,000 authorized shares of preferred stock. The existence of authorized but unissued shares of preferred stock may enable our board of directors to render more difficult or to discourage an attempt to obtain control of us by means of a merger, tender offer, proxy contest or otherwise. For example, if in the due exercise of its fiduciary obligations, our board of directors were to determine that a takeover proposal is not in the best interests of us or our stockholders, our board of directors could cause shares of preferred stock to be issued without stockholder approval in one or more private offerings or other transactions that might dilute the voting or other rights of the proposed acquirer or insurgent stockholder or stockholder group. In this regard, our Certificate of Incorporation grants our board of directors broad power to establish the rights and preferences of authorized and unissued shares of preferred stock. The issuance of shares of preferred stock could decrease the amount of earnings and assets available for distribution to holders of shares of Common Stock. The issuance may also adversely affect the rights and powers, including voting rights, of these holders and may have the effect of delaying, deterring or preventing a change in control of us.

•

Exclusive forum. Our Bylaws provide that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware shall be the sole and exclusive forum for any state law claims for: (i) any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf, (ii) any action asserting a claim of breach of a fiduciary duty owed by any of our directors or officers to us or our stockholders, (iii) any action asserting a claim against us arising pursuant to any provision of the DGCL or our Certificate of Incorporation or Bylaws, (iv) any action to interpret, apply, enforce, or determine the validity of our Certificate of Incorporation or Bylaws, or

113

(v) any action asserting a claim against us governed by the internal affairs doctrine. This exclusive forum provision will not apply to any causes of action arising under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act or any other claim for which the federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction. Unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternate forum, the United States District Court for the District of Delaware shall be the sole and exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act, as we are a Delaware corporation. Although our Bylaws contain the choice of forum provision described above, it is possible that a court could rule that such provisions are inapplicable for a particular claim or action or that such provisions are unenforceable.

Transfer Agent and Registrar

The transfer agent and registrar for our Common Stock is Computershare Trust Company, N.A. The transfer agent’s address is 250 Royall Street, Canton, MA 02021, and its telephone number is (800) 962-4284.

Exchange Listing

Our Common Stock is listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market under the symbol “GLTO.”

114

LEGAL MATTERS

Certain legal matters, including the legality of the securities offered, will be passed upon for us by Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, San Francisco, California. Additional legal matters may be passed upon for us or any underwriters, dealers or agents, by counsel that we will name in the applicable prospectus supplement.

115

EXPERTS

The consolidated financial statements of Galecto, Inc. appearing in Galecto, Inc.’s Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2024, have been audited by EY Godkendt Revisionspartnerselskab, independent registered public accounting firm, as set forth in their report thereon (which contains an explanatory paragraph describing conditions that raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern as described in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements), included therein, and incorporated herein by reference. Such consolidated financial statements are incorporated herein by reference in reliance upon such report given on the authority of such firm as experts in accounting and auditing.

116

WHERE YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION

We are subject to the informational requirements of the Exchange Act and are required to file annual, quarterly and other reports, proxy statements and other information with the SEC. The SEC maintains an Internet site (http://www.sec.gov) that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and various other information about us.

Information about us is also available at our website at https://galecto.com. However, the information on our website is not a part of this prospectus and is not incorporated by reference into this prospectus.

117

PART II

INFORMATION NOT REQUIRED IN PROSPECTUS

Item 14.

Other Expenses of Issuance and Distribution

The expenses payable by us in connection with the issuance and distribution of the securities being registered hereunder on Form S-3 (other than underwriting discounts and commissions, if any) are set forth below. The Selling Stockholders will not bear any portion of such expenses. Each item listed is estimated, except for the SEC registration fee:


SEC registration fee	$	221,625
Printing and engraving		25,000
Legal fees and expenses		300,000
Accounting fees and expenses		25,000
Transfer agent and registrar fees and expenses		—
Miscellaneous expenses		175,000

Total	$	746,625

Item 15.

Indemnification of Officers and Directors

Section 145 of the DGCL authorizes a corporation to indemnify its directors and officers against liabilities arising out of actions, suits and proceedings to which they are made or threatened to be made a party by reason of the fact that they have served or are currently serving as a director or officer to a corporation. The indemnity may cover expenses (including attorneys’ fees) judgments, fines and amounts paid in settlement actually and reasonably incurred by the director or officer in connection with any such action, suit or proceeding. Section 145 permits corporations to pay expenses (including attorneys’ fees) incurred by directors and officers in advance of the final disposition of such action, suit or proceeding. In addition, Section 145 provides that a corporation has the power to purchase and maintain insurance on behalf of its directors and officers against any liability asserted against them and incurred by them in their capacity as a director or officer, or arising out of their status as such, whether or not the corporation would have the power to indemnify the director or officer against such liability under Section 145.

We have adopted provisions in our Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws that limit or eliminate the personal liability of our directors to the fullest extent permitted by the DGCL, as it now exists or may in the future be amended. Consequently, a director will not be personally liable to us or our stockholders for monetary damages or breach of fiduciary duty as a director, except for liability for any breach of the director’s duty of loyalty to us or our stockholders; any act or omission not in good faith or that involves intentional misconduct or a knowing violation of law; any unlawful payments related to dividends or unlawful stock purchases, redemptions or other distributions; or any transaction from which the director derived an improper personal benefit.

These limitations of liability do not alter director liability under the federal securities laws and do not affect the availability of equitable remedies such as an injunction or rescission.

In addition, our Bylaws provide that:

•

we will indemnify our directors, officers and, in the discretion of our board of directors, certain employees to the fullest extent permitted by the DGCL, as it now exists or may in the future be amended; and

•

officers and certain employees, in connection with legal proceedings relating to their service for or on behalf of us, subject to limited exceptions.

II-1

We have entered into indemnification agreements with each of our directors, executive officers, and other officers as determined from time to time by our board of directors or our compensation committee. These agreements provide that we will indemnify each of our directors and officers with whom we have entered into indemnification agreements, and, at times, their affiliates to the fullest extent permitted by Delaware law. We will advance expenses, including attorneys’ fees (but excluding judgments, fines and settlement amounts), to each indemnified director, executive officer or affiliate in connection with any proceeding in which indemnification is available and we will indemnify our directors and officers for certain actions or proceedings arising out of that person’s services as a director or officer brought on behalf of us or in furtherance of our rights. Additionally, certain of our directors or officers may have certain rights to indemnification, advancement of expenses or insurance provided by their affiliates or other third parties, which indemnification relates to and might apply to the same proceedings arising out of such director’s or officer’s services as a director referenced herein. Nonetheless, our obligations to those same directors or officers are primary and any obligation of such affiliates or other third parties to advance expenses or to provide indemnification for the expenses or liabilities incurred by those directors are secondary.

We also maintain general liability insurance which covers certain liabilities of our directors and officers arising out of claims based on acts or omissions in their capacities as directors or officers, including liabilities under the Securities Act.

II-2

Item 16.

Exhibits


		Incorporated by Reference
Exhibit Number	Exhibit Description	Form	File No.	Exhibit	Filing Date	Filed Herewith

2.1	Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated November 10, 2025, by and among Galecto, Inc., Daylight Merger Sub I, Inc., Daylight Merger Sub II, LLC and Damora Therapeutics, Inc.	8-K	001-39655	2.1	11/10/2025

3.1	Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Galecto, Inc.	8-K	001-39655	3.1	11/04/2020

3.2	Amended and Restated By-laws of Galecto, Inc.	8-K	001-39655	3.2	11/04/2020

3.3	Certificate of Amendment to Amended and Restated By-laws of Galecto, Inc.	10-K	001-39655	3.5	3/19/2025

3.4	Certificate of Designation of Series B Non-Voting Convertible Preferred Stock.	8-K	001-39655	3.1	11/10/2025

3.5	Certificate of Designation of Series C Non-Voting Convertible Preferred Stock.	8-K	001-39655	3.2	11/10/2025

3.6	Certificate of Correction to the Certificate of Designation of Series C Non-Voting Convertible Preferred Stock.	8-K/A	001-39655	3.3	12/09/2025

4.1	Specimen Common Stock Certificate.	S-1/A	333-249369	4.1	10/22/2020

4.2	Form of Registration Rights Agreement, by and among Galecto, Inc. and certain investors signatory thereto.	8-K	001-39655	10.2	11/10/2025

5.1	Opinion of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP					X

10.1	Form of Securities Purchase Agreement, dated November 10, 2025, by and among Galecto, Inc. and each investor listed on Exhibit A thereto.	8-K	001-39655	10.1	11/10/2025

10.2*†	Antibody Discovery and Option Agreement, dated as of October 7, 2025, by and among Paragon Therapeutics, Inc., Paramora Holding LLC and Damora Therapeutics, Inc.					X

23.1	Consent of EY Godkendt Revisionspartnerselskab					X

23.2	Consent of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP (included in Exhibit 5.1)					X

24.1	Power of Attorney (included on the signature page to the registration statement)					X

107	Filing Fee Table					X

*	Exhibits and/or schedules have been omitted pursuant to Item 601(a)(5) of Regulation S-K. The registrant hereby undertakes to furnish supplementally copies of any of the omitted exhibits and schedules upon

II-3

request by the SEC; provided, however, that the registrant may request confidential treatment pursuant to Rule 24b-2 under the Exchange Act for any exhibits or schedules so furnished.

†	Certain portions of this exhibit (indicated by “[***]”) have been omitted because they are both (i) not material and (ii) customarily and actually treated as private or confidential.

Item 17.

Undertakings

(a) The undersigned Registrant hereby undertakes:

(1) To file, during any period in which offers or sales are being made, a post-effective amendment to this registration statement:

(i) to include any prospectus required by Section 10(a)(3) of the Securities Act;

(ii) to reflect in the prospectus any facts or events arising after the effective date of the registration statement (or the most recent post-effective amendment thereof) which, individually or in the aggregate, represent a fundamental change in the information set forth in the registration statement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any increase or decrease in volume of securities offered (if the total dollar value of securities offered would not exceed that which was registered) and any deviation from the low or high end of the estimated maximum offering range may be reflected in the form of prospectus filed with the SEC pursuant to Rule 424(b) if, in the aggregate, the changes in volume and price represent no more than 20 percent change in the maximum aggregate offering price set forth in the “Filing Fee Table” in the effective registration statement; and

(iii) to include any material information with respect to the plan of distribution not previously disclosed in the registration statement or any material change to such information in the registration statement;

provided, however, that subparagraphs (i),(ii), and (iii) do not apply if the information required to be included in a post-effective amendment by those paragraphs is contained in reports filed with or furnished to the SEC by the Registrant pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act that are incorporated by reference in the registration statement, or is contained in a form of prospectus filed pursuant to Rule 424(b) that is part of the registration statement.

(2) That, for the purpose of determining any liability under the Securities Act, each such post-effective amendment shall be deemed to be a new registration statement relating to the securities offered therein, and the offering of such securities at that time shall be deemed to be the initial bona fide offering thereof.

(3) To remove from registration by means of a post-effective amendment any of the securities being registered which remain unsold at the termination of the offering.

(4) That, for the purpose of determining liability under the Securities Act to any purchaser:

(i) Each prospectus filed by the Registrant pursuant to Rule 424(b)(3) shall be deemed to be part of the registration statement as of the date the filed prospectus was deemed part of and included in the registration statement; and

(ii) Each prospectus required to be filed pursuant to Rule 424(b)(2), (b)(5), or (b)(7) as part of a registration statement in reliance on Rule 430B relating to an offering made pursuant to Rule 415(a)(1)(i), (vii), or (x) for the purpose of providing the information required by Section 10(a) of the Securities Act shall be deemed to be part of and included in the registration statement as of the earlier of the date such form of prospectus is first used after effectiveness or the date of the first contract of sale of securities in the offering described in the prospectus. As provided in Rule 430B, for liability purposes of the issuer and any person that is at that date an underwriter, such date shall be deemed to be a new effective date of the registration statement relating to the securities in the registration statement to which that prospectus relates, and the offering of such securities at that time shall be deemed to be the initial bona fide offering thereof. Provided, however, that no statement made in a registration

II-4

statement or prospectus that is part of the registration statement or made in a document incorporated or deemed incorporated by reference into the registration statement or prospectus that is part of the registration statement will, as to a purchaser with a time of contract of sale prior to such effective date, supersede or modify any statement that was made in the registration statement or prospectus that was part of the registration statement or made in any such document immediately prior to such effective date.

(b) That, for purposes of determining any liability under the Securities Act, each filing of the Registrant’s annual report pursuant to Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act (and, where applicable, each filing of an employee benefit plan’s annual report pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act) that is incorporated by reference in the registration statement shall be deemed to be a new registration statement relating to the securities offered therein, and the offering of such securities at that time shall be deemed to be the initial bona fide offering thereof.

(c) Insofar as indemnification for liabilities arising under the Securities Act may be permitted to directors, officers, and controlling persons of the Registrant pursuant to the foregoing provisions, or otherwise, the Registrant has been advised that in the opinion of the SEC such indemnification is against public policy as expressed in the Securities Act and is, therefore, unenforceable. In the event that a claim for indemnification against such liabilities (other than the payment by the Registrant of expenses incurred or paid by a director, officer, or controlling person of the Registrant in the successful defense of any action, suit, or proceeding) is asserted by such director, officer, or controlling person in connection with the securities being registered, the Registrant will, unless in the opinion of its counsel the matter has been settled by controlling precedent, submit to a court of appropriate jurisdiction the question whether such indemnification by it is against public policy as expressed in the Securities Act and will be governed by the final adjudication of such issue.

II-5

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act, the Registrant certifies that it has reasonable grounds to believe that it meets all of the requirements for filing on Form S-3 and has duly caused this registration statement to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, in the Copenhagen, Denmark, on December 16, 2025.


GALECTO, INC.

By:		/s/ Hans T. Schambye, M.D., Ph.D.
		Hans T. Schambye, M.D., Ph.D.
		President, Chief Executive Officer and Director

POWER OF ATTORNEY

KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose signature appears below hereby constitutes and appoints Hans T. Schambye, M.D., Ph.D. and Lori Firmani, as his or her true and lawful attorneys-in-fact, proxies and agents, each with full power of substitution and resubstitution, for him or her in his or her name, place and stead, in any and all capacities, to sign any and all amendments to this registration statement (including post-effective amendments or any abbreviated registration statement and any amendments thereto filed pursuant to Rule 462(b) increasing the number of securities for which registration is sought), and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto and other documents in connection therewith, with the SEC and generally to do all such things in his or her name and behalf in his or her capacity as officers and directors to enable the Galecto, Inc. to comply with the provisions of the Securities Act and all requirements of the SEC, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact, proxies and agents, and each of them, full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in connection therewith, as fully for all intents and purposes as he or she might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said attorneys-in-fact, proxies and agents, or their or his or her substitute or substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act, this registration statement has been signed by the following persons in the capacities and on the dates indicated.


Signature	Title	Date

/s/ Hans T. Schambye, M.D., Ph.D. Hans T. Schambye, M.D., Ph.D.	President, Chief Executive Officer and Director (Principal Executive Officer)	December 16, 2025

/s/ Lori Firmani Lori Firmani	Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)	December 16, 2025

/s/ Carl Goldfischer, M.D. Carl Goldfischer, M.D.	Chairman	December 16, 2025

/s/ Julianne Bruno Julianne Bruno	Director	December 16, 2025

/s/ Christopher Cain, Ph.D. Christopher Cain, Ph.D.	Director	December 16, 2025

II-6


Signature	Title	Date

/s/ Jayson Dallas, M.D. Jayson Dallas, M.D.	Director	December 16, 2025

/s/ Peter Harwin Peter Harwin	Director	December 16, 2025

/s/ Amit D. Munshi Amit D. Munshi	Director	December 16, 2025

***

II-7

Source: View Original Filing on SEC EDGAR

Galecto is registering 60,513,309 shares of common stock for resale by selling stockholders. These include 265,309 Merger Common Shares, 16,366,000 Merger Conversion Series B Shares, 4,241,000 Merger Conversion Series C Shares, and 39,641,000 Private Placement Conversion Shares issuable upon conversion of Series B and Series C preferred stock.

No. Galecto states that it is not offering or selling any Resale Shares under this prospectus and will not receive any proceeds from the sale or other disposition of Resale Shares by the selling stockholders.

The Merger Common Shares and Merger Preferred Shares were issued to former Damora Therapeutics, Inc. stockholders in an asset acquisition that closed on November 10, 2025. The 39,641 PIPE Series C Preferred Shares (39,641,000 common on an as-converted basis) were sold to investors in a private placement raising approximately $285 million, which closed on November 12, 2025.

Conversion of Galecto’s Series B and Series C Preferred Stock into common stock is subject to Conversion Approval by stockholders under Nasdaq rules and to beneficial ownership limitations set by each holder. Each Series B share may convert into 1,000 common shares at the holder’s option, and each Series C share will automatically convert into 1,000 common shares after such approval and within ownership caps.

Galecto is now a biopharmaceutical company developing therapies for hematological malignancies, including myeloproliferative neoplasms and AML. Its pipeline includes mutCALR‑targeting antibodies DMR-001, DMR-002, DMR-003 and small molecule dual ENL‑YEATS/FLT3 inhibitor GB3226, with multiple clinical programs planned to start between 2026 and 2027.

Galecto intends to file an IND for DMR-001 in mid‑2026 and then start a Phase 1 trial in ET and MF patients using a subcutaneous formulation, subject to regulatory approval. It also plans to file an IND for GB3226 in AML patients in the first quarter of 2026 for an open‑label, dose‑escalation and expansion Phase 1 study.

Large accelerated filer

Accelerated filer

Non-accelerated filer

Smaller reporting company

Emerging growth company