Benitec Biopharma Inc. - Annual Report: 2022 (Form 10-K)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act.     Yes  ☐    No   ☒

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data file required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files).     Yes  ☒    No   ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, 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.

 

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 13(a) of the Exchange Act.  ☐

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).    Yes  ☐    No  ☒

$21,383,111.

There were 8,171,690 shares of the Registrant’s common stock, $0.0001 par value per share, outstanding on August 15, 2022.

None

 

 

 

Unless the context otherwise requires, the terms “Benitec,” the “Company,” “we,” “us,” “our” and similar terms used in this Annual Report on Form 10-K refer (i), prior to the Re-domiciliation (as defined herein) to Benitec Biopharma Limited (BBL), an Australian corporation, and its subsidiaries, and (ii), following the Re-domiciliation, to Benitec Biopharma Inc., a Delaware corporation, and its subsidiaries (including Benitec Limited). Any references to “Benitec Limited” or “BBL” refer to Benitec Biopharma Limited, an Australian corporation. On August 14, 2020, BBL reorganized as a Proprietary Limited company and changed its name to Benitec Biopharma Proprietary Limited.

All references to “$” in this Annual Report refer to U.S. dollars. All references to “A$” in this Annual Report mean Australian dollars. As of June 30, 2022, the rate of exchange of U.S. dollars to Australian dollars was 1.4512 AUD.

Our fiscal year-end is June 30. References to a particular “fiscal year” are to our fiscal year ended June 30 of that calendar year.

This Annual Report includes information with respect to market and industry conditions and market share from third-party sources or based upon estimates using such sources when available. We believe that such information and estimates are reasonable and reliable. We also believe the information extracted from publications of third- party sources has been accurately reproduced. However, we have not independently verified any of the data from third-party sources. Similarly, our internal research is based upon our understanding of industry conditions, and such information has not been verified by any independent sources.

We have proprietary and licensed rights to trademarks used in this Annual Report which are important to our business, many of which are registered under applicable intellectual property laws. Our trademarks include:

 

 

 

 

Solely for convenience, trademarks and trade names referred to in this Annual Report appear without the “” or “™” symbols, but such references are not intended to indicate, in any way, that we will not assert, to the fullest extent possible under applicable law, our rights or the rights of the applicable licensor to these trademarks and trade names. We do not intend our use or display of other companies’ trade names, trademarks or service marks to imply a relationship with, or endorsement or sponsorship of us by, any other companies. Each trademark, trade name or service mark of any other company appearing in this Annual Report is the property of its respective holder.

 

1

This Annual Report contains forward-looking statements that are subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, many of which are beyond our control. All statements, other than statements of historical fact included in this Annual Report, regarding our strategy, future operations, financial position, projected costs, prospects, plans and objectives of management are forward-looking statements. When used in this Annual Report, the words “could,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “estimate,” “expect,” “may,” “continue,” “predict,” “potential,” “project,” or the negative of these terms, and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements, although not all forward-looking statements contain such identifying words. These statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other important factors that may cause our actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements to be materially different from the information expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. These risks, uncertainties and factors include:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

as well as other risks detailed under the caption “Risk Factors” in this Annual Report and in other reports filed with the SEC. Although we believe that we have a reasonable basis for each forward-looking statement contained in this Annual Report, we caution you that these statements are based on a combination of facts and important factors currently known by us and our expectations of the future, about which we cannot be certain.

We have based the forward-looking statements included in this Annual Report on information available to us on the date of this Annual Report or on the date thereof. Except as required by law we undertake no obligation to revise or update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or

 

2

otherwise. You are advised to consult any additional disclosures that we may make directly to you or through reports that we, in the future, may file with the SEC, including annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K.

All forward-looking statements included herein or in documents incorporated herein by reference are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements contained or referred to elsewhere in this Annual Report.

 

We endeavor to become the leader in discovery, development, and commercialization of therapeutic agents capable of addressing significant unmet medical need via the application of the silence and replace approach to the treatment of genetic disorders.

Benitec Biopharma Inc. (“Benitec” or the “Company” or in the third person, “we” or “our”) is a development- stage biotechnology company focused on the advancement of novel genetic medicines with headquarters in Hayward, California. The proprietary platform, called DNA-directed RNA interference, or ddRNAi, combines RNA interference, or RNAi, with gene therapy to create medicines that facilitate sustained silencing of disease- causing genes following a single administration. The Company is developing ddRNAi-based therapeutics for chronic and life-threatening clinical indications including Oculopharyngeal Muscular Dystrophy (OPMD), a chronic, life-threatening genetic disorder.

BB-301 is the most advanced ddRNAi-based genetic medicine currently under development by Benitec. BB-301 is an AAV-based gene therapy designed to both silence the expression of mutated, disease-causing genes (to slow, or halt, the underlying mechanism of disease progression) and simultaneously replace the mutant genes with normal, “wild type” genes (to drive restoration of function in diseased cells). This fundamental therapeutic approach to disease management is called “silence and replace.” The silence and replace mechanism offers the potential to restore the normative physiology of diseased cells and tissues and to improve treatment outcomes for patients suffering from the chronic, and potentially fatal, effects of OPMD. BB-301 has been granted Orphan Drug Designation in the United States and the European Union.

The targeted gene silencing effects of RNAi, in conjunction with the durable transgene expression achievable via the use of modified viral vectors, imbues the silence and replace approach with the potential to produce long-term silencing of disease-causing genes along with simultaneous replacement of wild type gene function following a single administration of the proprietary genetic medicine. We believe that this novel mechanistic profile of the current and future investigational agents developed by Benitec could facilitate the achievement of robust and durable clinical activity while greatly reducing the frequency of drug administration traditionally expected for medicines employed for the management of chronic diseases. Additionally, the achievement of long-term gene silencing and gene replacement may significantly reduce the risk of patient non-compliance during the course of medical management of potentially fatal clinical disorders.

We will require additional financing to continue the development of our product candidates through key inflection points and to continue to execute on our business plan. See “Risk Factors—Our auditors’ report expresses doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.”

Our proprietary technology platforms are designated as DNA-directed RNA interference, or “ddRNAi”, and “silence and replace”. ddRNAi is designed to produce long-term silencing of disease-causing genes, by combining RNA interference, or RNAi, with viral delivery agents typically associated with the field of gene therapy (i.e., viral vectors). Modified AAV vectors are employed to deliver genetic constructs which encode short hairpin RNAs that are, then, serially expressed and processed to produce siRNA molecules within the transduced cell for the duration of the life of the target cell. These newly introduced siRNA molecules drive

 

3

long-term, and potentially permanent, silencing of the expression of the disease-causing gene. The silence and replace approach further bolsters the biological benefits of long-term silencing of disease-causing genes by incorporating multifunctional genetic constructs within the modified AAV vectors to create an AAV-based gene therapy agent that is designed to both silence the expression of mutated, disease-causing genes (to slow, or halt, the underlying mechanism of disease progression) and, simultaneously, replace the mutant genes with normal, “wild type” genes (to drive restoration of function in diseased cells). This fundamentally distinct therapeutic approach to disease management offers the potential to restore the underlying physiology of the treated tissues and, in the process, improve treatment outcomes for patients suffering from the chronic and, potentially, fatal effects of diseases like Oculopharyngeal Muscular Dystrophy (OPMD).

Traditional gene therapy is defined by the introduction of an engineered transgene to correct the pathophysiological derangements derived from mutated or malfunctioning genes. Mutated genes can facilitate the intracellular production of disease-causing proteins or hamper the production of critical, life-sustaining, proteins. The introduction of a new transgene can facilitate the restoration of production of normal proteins within the diseased cell, thus, restoring natural biological function. Critically, the implementation of this traditional method of gene therapy cannot eliminate the expression, or the potential deleterious effects of, the underlying mutant gene (as mutant proteins may be continually expressed and aggregate or drive the aggregation of other native proteins within the diseased cell). In this regard, the dual capabilities of the proprietary silence and replace approach to silence a disease-causing gene via ddRNAi and simultaneously replace the wildtype activity of a mutant gene via the delivery of an engineered transgene could facilitate the development of differentially efficacious treatments for a range of genetic disorders.

The mutation of a single gene can cause a chronic disease via the resulting intracellular production of a disease- causing protein (i.e., an abnormal form of the protein of interest), and many chronic and/or fatal disorders are known to result from the inappropriate expression of a single gene or multiple genes. In some cases, genetic disorders of this type can be treated exclusively by “silencing” the intracellular production of the disease-causing protein through well-validated biological approaches like RNA interference (“RNAi”). RNAi employs small nucleic acid molecules to activate an intracellular enzyme complex, and this biological pathway temporarily reduces the production of the disease-causing protein. In the absence of the disease-causing protein, normal cellular function is restored and the chronic disease that initially resulted from the presence of the mutant protein is partially or completely resolved. RNAi is potentially applicable to over 20,000 human genes and a large number of disease-causing microorganism-specific genes.

 

4

 

 

A small double stranded RNA, or dsRNA, molecule (A, Figure 1), comprising one strand known as the sense strand and another strand known as the antisense strand, which are complementary to each other, is synthesized in the laboratory. These small dsRNAs are called small interfering RNAs, or siRNAs. The sequence of the sense strand corresponds to a short region of the target gene mRNA. The siRNA is delivered to the target cell (B, Figure 1), where a group of enzymes, referred to as the RNA-Induced Silencing Complex, or RISC, process the siRNA (C, Figure 1), where one of the strands (usually the sense strand) is released (D, Figure 1). RISC uses the antisense strand to find the mRNA that has a complementary sequence (E, Figure 1) leading to the cleavage of the target mRNA (F, Figure 1). As a consequence, the output of the mRNA (protein production) does not occur (G, Figure 1). Several companies, including Alnylam Pharmaceuticals Inc. (“Alnylam”) and Arbutus Biopharma Corp. (“Arbutus”) utilize this approach in their RNAi product candidates.

Importantly, many genetic disorders are not amenable to the traditional gene silencing approach outlined in Figure 1, as the diseased cells may produce a mixture of the wild type protein of interest and the disease-causing mutant variant of the protein, and the underlying genetic mutation may be too small to allow for selective targeting of the disease-causing variant of the protein through the use of siRNA-based approaches exclusively. In these cases, it is extraordinarily difficult to selectively silence the disease-causing protein without simultaneously silencing the wild type intracellular protein of interest whose presence is vital to the conduct of normal cellular functions.

Our proprietary silence and replace technology utilizes the unique specificity and robust gene silencing capabilities of RNAi while overcoming many of the key limitations of siRNA-based approaches to disease management.

In the standard RNAi approach, double-stranded siRNA is produced synthetically and, subsequently, introduced into the target cell via chemical modification of the RNA or alternative methods of delivery. While efficacy has been demonstrated in several clinical indications through the use of this approach, siRNA-based approaches maintain a number of limitations, including:

 

5

 

 

 

 

 

 

Our proprietary silence and replace approach to the treatment of genetic diseases combines RNAi with wild type gene replacement to drive sustained silencing of disease-causing genes and concomitant restoration of functional wild type genes following a single administration of the therapeutic agent. Benitec employs ddRNAi in combination with classical gene therapy (i.e., transgene delivery via viral vectors) to overcome several of the fundamental limitations of RNAi.

The silence and replace approach to the treatment of genetic disorders employs adeno-associated viral vectors (“AAVs”) to deliver genetic constructs which may, after a single administration to the target tissues:

 

 

 

Our silence and replace technology utilizes proprietary DNA expression cassettes to foster continuous production of gene silencing shRNAs and wild type proteins (via expression of the wild type transgene). A range of viral and non-viral gene therapy vectors can be used to deliver the DNA construct into the nucleus of the target cell and, upon delivery, shRNA molecules are expressed and subsequently processed by intracellular enzymes into siRNA molecules that silence the expression of the mutant, disease-causing protein (Figure 2).

In the silence and replace approach (Figure 2):

 

 

 

6

 

 

 

Our strategy is to discover, develop and commercialize treatments that leverage the capabilities of ddRNAi and the silence and replace approach to disease management.

For selected product candidates, at the appropriate stage, we may collaborate with large biopharmaceutical companies to further co-develop and, if approved, commercialize our ddRNAi-based and silence and replace- based products to achieve broad clinical and commercial distribution. For specific clinical indications that we deem to be outside of our immediate areas of focus, we will continue to out-license, where appropriate, applications of our ddRNAi and silence and replace technology to facilitate the development of differentiated therapeutics, which could provide further validation of our proprietary technology and approach to disease management.

OPMD is an insidious, autosomal-dominant, late-onset degenerative muscle disorder that typically presents in patients at 40-to-50 years of age. The disease is characterized by progressive swallowing difficulties (dysphagia)

 

7

and eyelid drooping (ptosis). OPMD is caused by a specific mutation in the poly(A)-binding protein nuclear 1, or PABPN1, gene. OPMD is a rare disease; however, patients have been diagnosed with OPMD in at least 33 countries. Patient populations suffering from OPMD are well-identified, and significant geographical clustering has been noted for patients with this disorder, which could simplify clinical development and global commercialization efforts.

BB-301 is an AAV-based gene therapy designed to both silence the expression of mutated, disease-causing genes (to slow, or halt, the underlying mechanism of disease progression) and simultaneously replace the mutant genes with normal, “wild type” genes (to drive restoration of function in diseased cells). This fundamental therapeutic approach to disease management is called “silence and replace” and this biological mechanism offers the potential to restore the underlying physiology of the treated tissues and, in the process, improve treatment outcomes for patients suffering from the chronic and, potentially, fatal effects of Oculopharyngeal Muscular Dystrophy (OPMD). BB-301 has been granted Orphan Drug Designation in the United States and the European Union.

On July 9, 2018, the Company entered into a License and Collaboration Agreement with Axovant. Pursuant to the Agreement, the Company granted Axovant an exclusive worldwide license to develop, manufacture, and commercialize products containing the Company’s product known as BB-301, which was designed for the potential treatment of Oculopharyngeal Muscular Dystrophy. As of September 3, 2019, the License and Collaboration Agreement with Axovant was terminated. As a result, all rights and licenses which Benitec had granted to Axovant to develop and commercialize BB-301 and related gene therapy product candidates terminated. We are now solely responsible for the costs in connection with the development and commercialization of the BB-301 product candidates.

We believe that the combination of our proprietary ddRNAi technology and our deep expertise in the design and development of genetic medicines, and specifically ddRNAi-based therapeutics, will enable us to achieve and maintain a leading position in gene silencing and gene therapy for the treatment of human disease. Our key strengths include:

 

 

 

 

8

We endeavor to become the leader in discovery, development, and commercialization of therapeutic agents capable of addressing significant unmet medical need via the application of the silence and replace approach to the treatment of genetic disorders. We apply the following general strategy to drive the Company towards these goals:

 

 

Our senior leadership team will continue to explore partnership opportunities with global biopharmaceutical companies, as we expect that the unique attributes of the proprietary ddRNAi and silence and replace approaches, and the breadth of potential clinical indications amenable to our proprietary methods, to support the formation of collaborations over a broad range of diseases with significant unmet medical need.

We seek to actively protect our intellectual property and proprietary technology. These efforts are central to the growth of our business and include:

 

 

 

The following table sets forth our current product candidate and the development status:

 

 

BB-301 is under development for the treatment of Oculopharyngeal Muscular Dystrophy and is currently undergoing evaluation in Clinical Trial Application (CTA)-enabling and Investigational New Drug (IND)-enabling studies. BB-301 is the lead pipeline program for Benitec, and the key attributes of BB-301 are outlined in in Figure 3.

 

9

 

 

OPMD is an insidious, autosomal-dominant, late-onset, degenerative muscle disorder that typically presents in patients at 40-to-50 years of age. The disease is characterized by progressive swallowing difficulties (dysphagia) and eyelid drooping (ptosis). OPMD is caused by a specific mutation in the poly(A)-binding protein nuclear 1, or PABPN1, gene. OPMD is a rare disease, however, patients have been diagnosed with OPMD in at least 33 countries. Patient populations suffering from OPMD are well-identified, and significant geographical clustering has been noted for patients with this disorder, which could simplify clinical development and global commercialization efforts.

PABPN1 is a ubiquitous factor that promotes interaction between the poly(A) polymerase and CPSF (cleavage and polyadenylation specificity factor) and, thus, controls the length of mRNA poly(A) tails, mRNA export from the nucleus, and alternative poly(A) site usage. The characteristic genetic mutation underlying OPMD results in trinucleotide repeat expansion(s) within exon 1 of PABPN1 and results in an expanded poly-alanine tract at the N-terminal end of PABPN1. The mutation generates a protein with an N-terminal expanded poly-alanine tract of up to 18 contiguous alanine residues prone to the formation of aggregates called intranuclear inclusions (INIs). The INIs that sequester wild type PABPN1 could also contribute to loss of the function phenotype associated with OPMD.

No curative or disease-modifying therapies currently exist for OPMD patients. Surgical interventions can be undertaken for palliative purposes, including the use of cricopharyngeal myotomy.

 

10

Investigational therapies that have been explored, unsuccessfully, in the past include:

 

 

BB-301 is composed of a modified AAV serotype 9 (AAV9) capsid that expresses a bifunctional construct under the control of a single muscle specific Spc5-12 promoter to achieve co-expression of both the codon-optimized PABPN1 mRNA and two shmiR molecules directed against wild type and mutant PABPN1. BB-301 is designed to correct the genetic defect underlying OPMD following a single localized administration.

BB-301 is designed to target two distinct regions of the PABPN1 mRNA to accomplish gene silencing via the concomitant expression of two distinct shmiRs from a single DNA construct (). BB-301 is also engineered to drive the simultaneous expression of a codon-optimized, siRNA-resistant, version of the wild type PABPN1 gene .

 

 

In collaboration with researchers at the Royal Holloway University of London and the Institut de Myologie in Paris, we developed a ddRNAi construct expressing three shRNAs against three distinct regions of PABPN1 mRNA and observed effective silencing of the PABPN1 gene using this ddRNAi construct. Furthermore, as part of this collaboration, we have generated a gene expression construct that produces a siRNA-resistant version of the wild type PABPN1 gene.

In subsequent studies undertaken exclusively by Benitec, a second set of target regions within PABPN1 were identified for therapeutic development and shmiRs designed against these regions. Additional shmiRs have also been designed for the original shRNA developed in collaboration with Royal Holloway University of London and the Institut de Myologie. The ‘silence and replace’ construct, designated BB-301, incorporates the two best performing shmiRs, and the gene expression construct that produces a siRNA-resistant version of the wild type PABPN1 gene, under the control of a muscle-specific promoter. The mechanism of action of BB-301 is shown in Figure 5.

 

11

 

 

In initial studies evaluating the use of direct intramuscular injection of AAV-based constructs with the potential to facilitate the desired silence and replace approach in the A17 transgenic mouse model of OPMD at the Royal Holloway University of London and the Institut de Myologie, we observed decreases in muscle fibrosis, increases in cross sectional area of the treated muscles, decreases in intranuclear inclusions, and normalization of muscle strength. These nonclinical results were published in in April 2017.

In subsequent studies, Benitec demonstrated in a key nonclinical model (the A17 mouse model) that a single intramuscular injection of BB-301 results in robust intracellular silencing of PABPN1 protein production and concomitant expression of the normal, biologically functional PABPN1 protein. In the A17 mouse model, the treatment restores muscle strength and muscle weight to wild type levels and improves other physiological hallmarks of the disease (Figure 6a, Figure 6b, Figure 6c, Figure 6d):

 

 

 

 

 

12

 

 

 

 

 

13

 

 

 

 

Restoration of muscle strength was assessed by muscle contractility measurements in response to a series of induced impulses that ranged from 10 to 180 Hz

On July 8, 2020, Benitec announced the initiation of the BB-301 Pilot Dosing Study in large animal subjects.

 

14

The BB-301 Pilot Dosing Study was the first of two planned CTA-enabling and IND-enabling studies that were designed to be conducted in large animals. The BB-301 Pilot Dosing Study was carried out under the guidance of the scientific team at Benitec, with key elements of the study design and execution conducted in close collaboration with a team of leading experts in both medicine and surgery that have been deeply engaged in the treatment of OPMD patients for several decades. The BB-301 Pilot Dosing Study, along with the subsequent GLP Toxicology and Biodistribution Study, were conducted in canine subjects and were carried out to support the validation and optimization of the newly designed method of BB-301 administration, confirm the efficiency of vector transduction and transgene expression in the key tissue compartments underlying the natural history of OPMD, confirm the optimal drug doses in advance of initiation of human clinical studies, and facilitate observation of key toxicological data-points.

The BB-301 Pilot Dosing Study was designed as an 8-week study in Beagle dogs to confirm the transduction efficiency of BB-301 upon administration via direct intramuscular injection into specific anatomical regions of the pharynx through the use of an open surgical procedure. This new route of BB-301 administration was developed in collaboration with key surgical experts in the field of Otolaryngology, and this novel method of BB-301 dosing was implemented to significantly enhance the ability of a treating physician to accurately administer the AAV-based investigational agent to the muscles that underlie the characteristic deficits associated with the progression of OPMD. It is important to note that prior nonclinical studies of BB-301 have reproducibly validated the robust biological activity achieved following direct intramuscular injection. As an example, direct injection of BB-301 into the tibialis anterior muscles of A17 mice facilitated robust transduction of the targeted skeletal muscle cells and supported complete remission of the OPMD disease phenotype in this animal model.

Interim results of the BB-301 Pilot Dosing Study were reported in 2021:

Benitec conducted the BB-301 Pilot Dosing Study in Beagle dog subjects to demonstrate that direct intramuscular injection of BB-301 via the use of a proprietary dosing device in an open surgical procedure could safely achieve the following goals:

 

 

 

The Pilot Dosing Study evaluated the safety and biological activity of two concentrations of BB-301 (1.0+E13 vg/mL and 3.0+E13 vg/mL) across three distinct doses (1.0+E13 vg/mL, 3.0+E13 vg/mL with a low injection volume, and 3.0+E13 vg/mL with a high injection volume) following direct intramuscular injection into the Hypopharyngeus (HP) muscles and the Thyropharyngeus (TP) muscles of Beagle dogs via the use of a proprietary delivery device employed in an open surgical procedure. The HP muscle in Beagle dogs corresponds to the Middle Pharyngeal Constrictor muscle in human subjects, and the TP muscle in Beagle dogs corresponds to the Inferior Pharyngeal Constrictor muscle in human subjects. Atrophy, fibrosis, and the presence of intranuclear inclusions characterize the Middle Pharyngeal Constrictor muscles and the Inferior Pharyngeal Constrictor muscles of human subjects diagnosed with OPMD. BB-301 was injected into the pharyngeal muscles of the Beagle dog subjects only on Day 1 of the Pilot Dosing Study, and the corresponding canine pharyngeal muscles were harvested for analysis after 8 weeks of observation post-dosing. BB-301 dosing was carried out independently by both a veterinary surgeon and a practicing Otolaryngologist who has extensive experience with the provision of palliative surgical care for OPMD patients.

 

15

 

 

 

 

 

 

16

 

 

 

17

 

 

 

18

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

19

 

 

Finally, it is critical to highlight the key methodological distinctions between the recently completed BB-301 Pilot Dosing Study in Beagle dogs conducted by Benitec (i.e., the study described above) and the prior Beagle dog dosing study carried out independently by the previous BB-301 licensee of Benitec. The BB-301 dosing study conducted by the prior BB-301 licensee employed non-ideal routes and methods of BB-301 administration to the target pharyngeal muscle tissues and employed similarly limited analytical methods at the completion of the dosing phase of the study. The Benitec team worked to optimize the route and method of administration of BB-301 and to refine the core analytical methods employed following the completion of dosing.

Following the implementation of these methodological modifications, Benitec demonstrated a 248-fold improvement (+24,650%) in BB-301 transduction of the HP muscle and a 111-fold improvement (+11,027%) in BB-301 transduction of the TP muscle relative to the levels of BB-301 transduction observed by the previous BB-301 licensee (Figure 12).

 

20

 

 

Benitec continues to plan for the initiation of the clinical development program for BB-301 in 2H2022

Benitec seeks to actively procure rights to and protect the intellectual property and proprietary technology that it believes is important to its business. Such intellectual property rights include patents claiming our ddRNAi and silence and replace technologies, as well as know-how and trade secrets related to our product candidates and proprietary technology.

Benitec’s patent portfolio for OPMD includes five patent families relating to shRNA and shmiRs targeting PABPN1 (the causative gene for OPMD), as well as ‘silence and replace’ therapeutics and treatment strategies for OPMD. These five families cover the OPMD therapeutic candidate, BB-301, under development at Benitec, treatment strategies for OPMD that silence PABPN1 which is causative for OPMD and replace with functional PABPN1, and Benitec’s AAV patent family which covers the delivery system for BB-301. BB-301 is a ‘silence and replace’ construct encoding two shmiRs targeting the endogenous PABPN1 (including variants causative of OPMD) internally designated shmiR-13 and shmiR-17, as well as a codon-optimized PABPN1 replacement construct, the transcript of which is not targeted by shmiR-13 and shmiR-17. Both shmiRs and the codon- optimized PABPN1 replacement construct are under the control of a muscle-specific promoter.

The first patent family, entitled “Reagents for treatment of oculopharyngeal muscular dystrophy (OPMD) and use thereof (OPMD family #1)”, arose out of a collaboration with Royal Holloway University of London (RHUL) and relates to three shRNA target regions within PABPN1. RHUL assigned its ownership interests in this patent family to Benitec, and the PCT application and the related U.S. priority document were filed solely in the name of Benitec. This patent family is directed to RNAi agents targeting specific regions within mutant

 

21

PABPN1 variants causative of OPMD, as well as use of those RNAi agents in combination with PABPN1 replacement constructs to treat OPMD. More specifically, this family includes claims covering shmiR17 of BB-301 This patent family entered the national/regional phase in October/November 2018.

The second patent family, entitled “Reagents for treatment of oculopharyngeal muscular dystrophy (OPMD) and use thereof (OPMD family #2)” relates to a second set of target gene sequences within PABPN1 as well as ‘silence and replace’ construct BB-301 under development at Benitec. The PCT application and the related U.S. priority document were filed solely in the name of Benitec, and this family entered the national/regional phase in June/July 2019. This patent family is directed to RNAi agents targeting specific regions within mutant PABPN1 variants causative of OPMD, as well as ‘silence and replace’ constructs and use of same for treatment of OPMD. More specifically, this family includes claims covering shmiR13 and shmiR17 of BB-301 separately, as well as the full BB-301 ‘knockdown and replacement’ construct.

A third patent family, entitled “Methods for Treating Oculopharyngeal Muscular Dystrophy (OPMD) (OPMD family #3)” has been filed to pursue claims which are broadly directed to the ‘silence and replace’ treatment concept for OPMD, relying on RNAi agents to knockdown PABPN1 and replacement with functional PABPN1 which is not targeted by the RNAi agents. The claims in this application are not limited to BB-301. This patent family exists as a PCT application and was filed solely in the name of Benitec.

A fourth patent family, entitled “Methods for Treating Oculopharyngeal Muscular Dystrophy (OPMD) (OPMD family #4)” has been filed to specifically claim the OPMD therapeutic candidate developed by Benitec, BB-301 (described herein). This patent family exists as a PCT application and was filed solely in the name of Benitec.

The Benitec patent portfolio includes a single patent family, entitled “,” which relates to an AAV having a modified phospholipase (PLA2) domain in the capsid. The modified AAV will be used as the delivery system for the OPMD therapeutic.

 

22

We are aware of a third party patent directed to AAV vectors that expires in 2026. In the event we receive regulatory marketing approval before the expiration date it may be necessary for us to obtain a license to the patent in order to commercialize. We cannot guarantee the availability of the license or that it can be obtained on commercially reasonable terms.

In addition to patent protection of ddRNAi and other technology and our product candidates, we also rely on proprietary know-how that is not patentable or that we elect not to patent, as valuable intellectual property for our business. This know-how is related to the areas of, among others, identifying nucleic acid targets for ddRNAi technology and designing ddRNAi constructs for targeting preferred genes. We have implemented a number of security measures designed to safeguard our know-how including limiting access to our research facilities, databases and networks. We also seek to protect our know-how by way of confidentiality agreements when engaging with external providers for progressing our pipeline of therapeutic candidates.

The term of individual patents depends upon the legal terms of the patents in the countries in which they are obtained. In most countries in which we file, the patent term is 20 years from the earliest date of filing a non-provisional patent application. In the United States, a patent term may be shortened if a patent is terminally disclaimed over another patent or as a result of delays in patent prosecution by the patentee. A patent’s term may be lengthened by a patent term adjustment, which compensates a patentee for administrative delays by the USPTO in granting a patent. The patent term of a European patent is 20 years from its filing date, which, unlike in the United States, is not subject to patent term adjustments.

The term of a patent that covers an FDA-approved biologic may also be eligible for patent term extension, which permits patent term restoration as compensation for the patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process. The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, or the Hatch-Waxman Act, permits a patent term extension of up to five years beyond the expiration of the patent. The length of the patent term extension is related to the length of time the biologic is under clinical testing regulatory review. Patent extension cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval and only one patent applicable to an approved biologic may be extended. Similar provisions are available in Europe and other jurisdictions to extend the term of a patent that covers an approved biologic although the eligibility requirements for any duration of such extension vary. In the future, if and when our products receive FDA approval, or approval from an equivalent regulatory body in another jurisdiction in which patent protection is sought or obtained, we expect to apply for patent term extensions on patents covering those products.

 

23

Our trademarks include registrations for company branding and product names for our pipeline in development. The trademarks that we use in connection with our business include the following:

 

The manufacture of the biological products required for gene therapy is complex and difficult. We do not currently own or operate manufacturing facilities for the production of preclinical, clinical or commercial quantities of any of our product candidates. We are exploring long-term manufacturing alliances with a number of potential partners to investigate manufacturing processes in order to produce materials at reasonable scale and cost of goods to support future commercialization efforts. We do not have a long-term agreement with any third- party manufacturer, but we plan to establish such a relationship with an appropriate manufacturer to serve our long-term needs.

Manufacturing is subject to extensive regulations that impose various procedural and documentation requirements, which govern record keeping, manufacturing processes and controls, personnel, quality control and quality assurance, among others. Our contract manufacturing organizations manufacture our product candidates under cGMP conditions. cGMP is a regulatory standard for the production of pharmaceuticals that will be used in humans.

We have not yet established sales, marketing or product distribution operations because our product candidates are in preclinical or clinical development. If we receive marketing and commercialization approval for any of our

 

24

product candidates, we intend to market the product through strategic alliances and distribution agreements with third parties. In certain cases, we may market an approved product directly worldwide or in selected geographical segments. The ultimate implementation of our strategy for realizing the financial value of our product candidates is dependent on the results of clinical trials for our product candidates, the availability of funds and the ability to negotiate acceptable commercial terms with third parties.

 

25

The biopharmaceutical industry is characterized by intense and dynamic competition to develop new technologies and proprietary therapies.

Any product candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize will have to compete with existing therapies and new therapies that may become available in the future. While we believe that our proprietary technology and scientific expertise in gene silencing using ddRNAi provide us with competitive advantages, we face potential competition from many different sources, including larger and better-funded pharmaceutical, specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, as well as from academic institutions and governmental agencies and public and private research institutions that may develop potentially competitive products or technologies. We are aware of several companies focused on developing gene therapy or gene silencing product candidates, including Alnylam, Arbutus and Arrowhead.

We are not aware of any companies developing a gene therapy or gene silencing approach for OPMD. Our product candidates, if approved, would also compete with treatments that have already been approved and accepted by the medical community, patients and third-party payers.

Many of our competitors and potential competitors, alone or with their strategic partners, have substantially greater financial, technical and human resources than we do and significantly greater experience in the discovery and development of product candidates, obtaining FDA and other regulatory approvals of treatments and the commercialization of those treatments. Mergers and acquisitions in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and establishing clinical study sites and subject registration for clinical studies, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies.

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

Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient or are less expensive than any products that we may develop. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. In addition, we expect that our therapeutic products, if approved, will be priced at a significant premium over competitive products and our ability to compete may be affected in many cases by insurers or other third-party payers seeking to encourage the use of competitive products including biosimilar or generic products.

This increasingly competitive landscape may compromise the development of our product candidates.

As a pharmaceutical and biological product company that wishes to conduct clinical trials and ultimately obtain marketing approval in the United States, we are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA, and other federal, state, and local regulatory agencies. The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or the FDC Act, the Public Health Service Act, or PHS Act, and their implementing regulations set forth, among other things, requirements for the research, testing, development, manufacture, quality control, safety, effectiveness, approval, labeling, storage, record keeping, reporting, distribution, import, export, advertising and promotion of our products. A failure to comply explicitly with any requirements during the product development, approval, or post-approval

 

26

periods, may lead to administrative or judicial sanctions. These sanctions could include the imposition by the FDA or an IRB, of a suspension on clinical trials, refusal to approve pending marketing applications or supplements, withdrawal of approval, warning letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, civil penalties or criminal prosecution.

Although the discussion below focuses on regulation in the United States, we anticipate seeking approval for the testing and marketing of our products in other countries. Generally, our activities in other countries will be subject to regulation that is similar in nature and scope as that imposed in the United States, although there can be important differences. Additionally, some significant aspects of regulation in the European Union are addressed in a centralized way through the EMA, but country-specific regulation remains essential in many respects.

Government regulation may delay or prevent testing or marketing of our products and impose costly procedures upon our activities. The testing and marketing approval process, and the subsequent compliance with appropriate statutes and regulations, requires substantial time, effort, and financial resources, and we cannot be certain that the FDA or any other regulatory agency will grant marketing approvals for our products or any future products on a timely basis, if at all. The FDA’s or any other regulatory agency’s policies may change and additional governmental regulations may be enacted that could prevent or delay regulatory approval of our products or any future products or approval of new indications or label changes. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of adverse governmental regulation that might arise from future legislative, judicial, or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad.

The FDA has provided guidance for the development of gene therapy products. For example, the FDA has established the Office of Tissues and Advanced Therapies (formerly Office of Cellular, Tissue and Gene Therapies) within CBER, to consolidate the review of gene therapy and related products, and the Cellular, Tissue and Gene Therapies Advisory Committee to advise CBER on its reviews. In addition, the FDA has issued a growing body of clinical guidelines, chemical, manufacturing and control, or CMC, guidelines, regenerative medicine guidelines and other guidelines, all of which are intended to facilitate industry’s development of gene therapy products.

In 2016, Section 3033 of the 21st Century Cures Act created a new product category called “regenerative medicine advanced therapy”, or the RMAT designation. The RMAT designation gives the sponsor of a new investigational biologic access to increased meeting opportunities with the FDA, in a manner comparable to those offered to sponsors of therapies designated as “breakthrough therapies” by the FDA. Because the designated products meet the criteria for unmet medical need in the treatment of a serious condition, they may be eligible for priority review, in which the initial assessment of the BLA is reduced from 12 months to eight months, and accelerated approval, which bases approval on an effect on a predictive surrogate endpoint or an intermediate clinical endpoint. RMATs qualifying for such accelerated approval may be able to satisfy licensing requirements through commitment to post-approval clinical studies as well as real-world data such as patient registries and health record analysis. The eligibility of the RMAT-designated product for these expedited programs can be discussed with the FDA at specific development meetings, but we do not know whether any of our current or future product candidates will be eligible for RMAT designation. We believe the increased access to the FDA during early development is a benefit for sponsors, because the typical Type B development meetings are normally restricted to one each at the stages of pre-IND, end of Phase II/pre-Phase III and pre-BLA submission. In addition, the option to qualify for a fast-track program, also based on the potential to serve an unmet medical need in the treatment of a serious condition, allows for a so-called “rolling review” of parts of the BLA, which can be submitted for assessment following agreement of a review timetable with CBER.

The FDA plans to include certain gene therapy products that permanently alter tissue and produce a sustained therapeutic benefit as part of the products that will meet the definition of being eligible to come under the pathway enabled by RMAT designation. RMAT designation enables gene therapy products to access the FDA’s existing expedited programs to help foster the development and approval of gene therapy products. Our product candidates may not be eligible for RMAT designation now or in the future.

 

27

In May 2016, the EMA approved a second gene therapy product called Strimvelis, the first approved stem cell gene therapy, to treat patients with a very rare disease called ADA-SCID (Severe Combined Immunodeficiency due to Adenosine Deaminase deficiency).

In August 2017, the FDA approved the first gene therapy product in the United States. The FDA approved Kymriah (tisagenlecleucel) for the treatment of certain pediatric and young adult patients with a form of acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Kymriah is a genetically-modified autologous T-cell immunotherapy. Because of the risk of cytokine release syndrome and neurological events, Kymriah is being approved with a REMS. In December 2017, the FDA approved Luxturna (voretigene neparvovec-rzyl), a gene therapy to treat children and adult patients with an inherited form of vision loss that may result in blindness. Luxturna is the first directly administered gene therapy approved in the United States that targets a disease caused by mutations in a specific gene.

In the United States, for premarket approval purposes, the FDA regulates gene therapy products as biologics under the FDC Act, the PHS Act and related regulations.

The steps required before a new biologic may be marketed in the United States generally include:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Before testing any biologic in humans, the product enters the nonclinical, or preclinical, testing stage. Nonclinical tests include laboratory evaluations of product chemistry, toxicity, and formulation, as well as animal studies to assess the potential safety and activity of the product. The conduct of nonclinical tests must comply with federal regulations and requirements including GLPs.

Where a gene therapy trial is conducted at, or sponsored by, institutions receiving NIH funding for recombinant DNA research, prior to the submission of an IND to the FDA, a protocol and related documentation is submitted to and the trial is registered with the NIH Office of Science Policy, or OSP.

The product sponsor then submits the results of the nonclinical testing, together with manufacturing information, analytical data, any available clinical data or literature, and a proposed clinical protocol, to the FDA in an IND, which is a request for authorization from the FDA to administer an investigational product to humans. Some nonclinical testing may continue even after the IND application is submitted. IND authorization is required before interstate shipping and administration of any new product to humans that is not the subject of an approved

 

28

BLA. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA unless the FDA, within the 30-day time period, raises concerns or questions about the conduct of the clinical trial and places the clinical trial on a clinical hold. In such case, the IND sponsor must resolve any outstanding concerns with the FDA before the clinical trial may begin. Further, an IRB for each site proposing to conduct the clinical trial must review and approve the plan for any clinical trial before it commences at that site. If the site has an IBC, it may also have to review and approve the proposed clinical trial. Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational product to patients under the supervision of qualified investigators following GCPs, requirements meant to protect the rights and health of patients and to define the roles of clinical trial sponsors, investigators, and monitors. Clinical trials are conducted under protocols that detail, among other things, the objectives of the clinical trial, dosing procedures, subject selection and exclusion criteria, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety, including stopping rules that assure a clinical trial will be stopped if certain adverse events should occur, and the efficacy criteria to be evaluated. Each protocol involving testing on U.S. patients and subsequent protocol amendments must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. The informed written consent of each participating subject is required and the form and content of the informed consent must be approved by each IRB.

The clinical investigation of an investigational product is generally divided into three phases. Although the phases are usually conducted sequentially, they may overlap or be combined in some cases. The three phases of an investigation are as follows:

 

 

 

Annual progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials must be submitted to the FDA. Written IND safety reports must be promptly submitted to the FDA and the investigators for serious and unexpected adverse events; any findings from other studies, tests in laboratory animals or testing that suggest a significant risk for human subjects; or any clinically important increase in the rate of a serious suspected adverse reaction over that listed in the protocol or investigator brochure. The sponsor must submit an IND safety report within 15

 

29

calendar days after the sponsor determines that the information qualifies for reporting. The sponsor also must notify the FDA of any unexpected fatal or life-threatening suspected adverse reaction within seven calendar days after the sponsor’s initial receipt of the information. The FDA typically recommends that sponsors observe subjects for potential gene therapy-related delayed adverse events for a 15-year period, including a minimum of five years of annual examinations followed by 10 years of annual queries, either in person or by questionnaire, of trial subjects.

The decision to terminate a clinical trial of an investigational biologic may be made by the FDA or other regulatory authority, an IRB, an IBC, or institutional ethics committee, or by a company for various reasons. The FDA may place a clinical hold and order the temporary, or permanent, discontinuation of a clinical trial at any time, or impose other sanctions, if it believes that the clinical trial either is not being conducted in accordance with FDA requirements or presents an unacceptable risk to the clinical trial patients. If the FDA imposes a clinical hold, trials may not recommence without FDA and IRB authorization and then only under terms authorized by the FDA and IRB. In some cases, clinical trials are overseen by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the trial sponsor, or the clinical monitoring board or DSMB. This group provides authorization for whether or not a trial may move forward at designated check points. These decisions are based on the limited access to data from the ongoing trial. The suspension or termination of a clinical trial can occur during any phase of clinical trials if it is determined that the participants or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. In addition, there are requirements for the registration of ongoing clinical trials of drugs and biologics on public registries and the disclosure of certain information pertaining to the trials as well as clinical trial results after completion.

Assuming successful completion of all required testing in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements, detailed investigational product information is submitted to the FDA in the form of a BLA for a biologic to request marketing approval for the product in specified indications.

Human gene therapy products are a new category of therapeutics. Because this is a relatively new and expanding area of novel therapeutic interventions, there can be no assurance as to the length of the trial period, the number of patients the FDA will require to be enrolled in the trials in order to establish the safety, efficacy, purity and potency of human gene therapy products, or that the data generated in these trials will be acceptable to the FDA to support marketing approval. The NIH and the FDA have a publicly accessible database, the Genetic Modification Clinical Research Information System, which includes information on gene transfer trials and serves as an electronic tool to facilitate the reporting and analysis of adverse events on these trials. Over the last several years the FDA has issued helpful guidance on development of gene therapy products and shown a willingness to work closely with developers, especially with those working in orphan disease areas.

In order to obtain approval to market a biologic in the United States, a BLA must be submitted to the FDA that provides data from nonclinical studies and clinical trials and manufacturing information establishing to the FDA’s satisfaction the safety, purity, and potency or efficacy of the investigational product for the proposed indication. The BLA must be accompanied by a substantial user fee payment unless a waiver or exemption applies.

The FDA will initially review the BLA for completeness before it accepts it for filing. Under the FDA’s procedures, the agency has 60 days from its receipt of a BLA to determine whether the application will be accepted for filing based on the agency’s threshold determination that the application is sufficiently complete to permit substantive review. After the BLA submission is accepted for filing, the FDA reviews the BLA to determine, among other things, whether the proposed product is safe, pure and potent, which includes determining whether it is effective for its intended use, and whether the product is being manufactured in accordance with cGMP, to assure and preserve the product’s identity, safety, strength, quality, potency and purity, and in accordance with biological product standards. The FDA will inspect the facilities at which the product is manufactured to ensure the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with cGMP

 

30

Employees

Corporate Information

Re-domiciliation

Available Information

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

Investing in our securities involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below together with all of the other information contained in this Annual Report, including our consolidated financial statements and the related notes, before deciding to invest in our securities. The risks and uncertainties described below and in the documents incorporated by reference herein are not the only ones we face. Additional risks and uncertainties that we are unaware of, or that we currently believe are not material, may also become important factors that affect us. If any of the following risks actually occurs, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially and adversely affected, and the trading price of our common stock could decline.

Risk Factor Summary

Risks Related to Our Financial Condition, Capital Requirements

Our auditors’ report expresses doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern.”

Risks Related to the Product Development and Regulatory Approval of Our Product Candidates

.

We may develop related diagnostics for some of our therapeutic product candidates. Such related diagnostics are subject to regulation by the FDA and typically to comparable foreign regulatory authorities as medical devices and typically require separate regulatory approval or clearance prior to commercialization. Marketing approval or clearance of the diagnostic will require sufficient data to support its safety and efficacy. In addition, at least in some cases, the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require the development and regulatory approval or clearance of a related diagnostic as a condition to approving our therapeutic product candidates. While we have some limited experience in developing diagnostics, we plan to rely in large part on third parties to perform these functions. We may seek to enter into arrangements with one or more third parties to create a related diagnostic for use with our current or future product candidates.

If we or any third parties that we engage to assist us are unable to successfully develop or obtain marketing approval or clearance for related diagnostics for our therapeutic product candidates, or experience delays in doing so:

 

 

 

If any of these events were to occur, our business would be harmed.

We cannot commercialize a product until the appropriate regulatory authorities have reviewed and approved the product candidate. Even if our product candidates demonstrate safety and efficacy in clinical trials, the regulatory agencies may not complete their review processes in a timely manner, or we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval. Additional delays may result if an FDA Advisory Committee or comparable foreign regulatory authority recommends non-approval or restrictions on approval. In addition, we may experience delays or rejections based upon additional government regulation from future legislation or administrative action, or changes in regulatory agency policy during the period of product development, clinical trials and the review process. Regulatory agencies may also approve a treatment candidate for fewer or more limited indications than requested, may not approve the price we intend to charge for our product candidate, may limit our ability to promote the product, may impose significant limitations upon the approval of the product, including, but not limited to, narrow indications, significant warnings, precautions or contraindications with respect to conditions of use, or may grant approval subject to the performance of post-marketing studies. In addition, regulatory agencies may not approve the labeling claims that are necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of our product candidates. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may impose a REMS or other conditions upon our approval that limit our ability to commercialize the product candidate.

 

51

The ability of the FDA to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, 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 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 may also slow the time necessary for new drugs to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, in recent years, including in 2018 and 2019, the U.S. government shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, had to furlough critical employees and stop critical activities. Separately, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the FDA postponed most inspections of foreign manufacturing facilities and products, postponed routine surveillance inspections of domestic manufacturing facilities and is conducting only teleconference meetings. Regulatory authorities outside the United States may adopt similar restrictions or other policy measures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. 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, in our operations as a public company, 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.

Even if we obtain regulatory approval in a jurisdiction, the regulatory authority may still impose significant restrictions on the indicated uses or marketing of our product candidates, or impose ongoing requirements for potentially costly post-approval studies or post-market surveillance. For example, the holder of an approved BLA is obligated to monitor and report to the FDA adverse events and any failure of a product to meet the specifications in the BLA. FDA guidance advises that patients treated with some types of gene therapy undergo follow-up observations for potential adverse events for as long as 15 years. The holder of an approved BLA must also submit new or supplemental applications and obtain FDA approval for certain changes to the approved product, product labeling or manufacturing process. Advertising and promotional materials must comply with FDA rules and are subject to FDA review, in addition to other potentially applicable foreign, federal and state laws.

In addition, product manufacturers and their establishments, products and applications are subject to payment of user fees/or and continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for compliance with cGMP and comparable foreign requirements, and adherence to commitments made in the BLA. If we or a regulatory agency discover previously unknown problems with a product such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where the product is manufactured, a regulatory agency may impose restrictions relative to that product or the manufacturing facility, including requiring recall or withdrawal of the product from the market or suspension of manufacturing.

If we fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements following approval of any of our product candidates, a regulatory agency may:

 

 

 

 

52

 

 

 

 

Any government investigation of alleged violations of law could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity. The occurrence of any event or penalty described above may inhibit our ability to commercialize our product candidates and generate revenues.

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

Further, clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries. Regulatory approval of a product candidate in one country does not ensure approval in any other country, but a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one country may have a negative effect on the regulatory approval process in other countries. Also, regulatory approval for any of our product candidates may be withdrawn based on adverse events reported or regulatory decisions made in other countries. If we fail to comply with the regulatory requirements in international markets and/or fail to receive applicable marketing approvals, our target market will be reduced, our ability to realize the full market potential of our product candidates will be compromised and our business may be adversely affected.

The success of our business depends primarily upon our ability to identify, develop and commercialize products based on our platform technology. We do not have any products on the market and are early in our development efforts. All of our product candidates are in preclinical development. Our product candidates derived from our

 

53

platform technology may not successfully complete investigational new drug, or IND, enabling studies, and our research programs may fail to identify other potential product candidates for clinical development for a number of reasons. Our and our collaborators’ research methodology may be unsuccessful in identifying potential product candidates, our potential product candidates may not demonstrate the necessary preclinical outcomes to progress to clinical studies, or our product candidates may be shown to have harmful side effects or may have other characteristics that may make the products unmarketable or unlikely to receive marketing approval.

If any of these events occur, we may be forced to discontinue our development efforts for a program or programs. Research programs to identify new product candidates require substantial technical, financial and human resources. We may focus our efforts and resources on potential programs or product candidates that ultimately prove to be unsuccessful.

Of our current pipeline product candidates, only our silence and replace therapeutic for the treatment of OPMD has been designated with orphan drug status. In January 2018, the FDA granted such designation after our candidate for the treatment of OPMD had been designated an orphan drug in January 2017 by the European Commission. Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the United States, may designate drugs or biological products for relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs. Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a product as an orphan drug if it is a product intended to treat a “rare disease or condition”, which is generally defined as any disease or condition which affects less than 200,000 individuals in the United States. The FDA may also designate a product as an orphan drug if it is intended to treat a disease or condition which affects more than 200,000 individuals in the United States and there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making a drug or biological product available in the United States for this type of disease or condition will be recovered from sales of the product candidate. Generally, if a product with an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first marketing approval for the indication for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to a period of marketing exclusivity, which precludes the FDA from approving another marketing application for the same drug for such indication for that time period. The applicable period is seven years in the United States. Orphan drug exclusivity may be lost if the FDA or the European Medicines Agency, or the EMA, determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantity of the drug to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition. While there is no guarantee, FDA orphan drug designation may provide a range of benefits, including a potential fast track process for clinical regulatory approval, potential tax credits for qualified clinical trials and an exemption from FDA application user fees.

Even if we obtain orphan drug exclusivity for a product in the United States or for additional products in the European Union, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product from competition because different drugs can be approved for the same condition, and the same drug could be approved for a different condition. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA can subsequently approve the same drug, made by a competitor, for the same condition if the FDA concludes that the competitive product is clinically superior in that it is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care. In the European Union, the EMA can approve a competitive product if the orphan drug no longer meets the criteria for orphan designation (including sufficient profitability), if the competitive product is safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior, or if the orphan drug cannot be supplied in sufficient quantities.

We rely on third parties for certain aspects of the research, development, commercialization and marketing of our current and any future product candidates. Other than as provided for in our collaboration agreements, we have

 

54

no control over the resources, time and effort that our collaborators may devote to the development of product candidates. We are dependent on our collaborators to conduct some aspects of the research and development of each of our product candidates, and expect to need access to them to facilitate and/or to complete the regulatory process. We will likely rely on a pharmaceutical company for the successful marketing and commercialization of any such product candidates for which they/we receive approval, if any. There can be no guarantee at this stage that we will conclude a partnership with such a company on favorable terms, or at all, nor even if we do so, that success will be achieved.

Our ability to recognize revenues from successful potential collaborations may be impaired by multiple factors including:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

If our potential collaborators do not perform in the manner we expect or fulfill their responsibilities in a timely manner, or at all, the development, regulatory and commercialization process could be delayed or discontinued or otherwise be unsuccessful. Conflicts between us and our collaborators may arise. In the event of discontinuation of one or more of our collaboration agreements, it may become necessary for us to assume the responsibility for any such product candidates at our own expense or seek new collaborators. In that event, we likely would be required to limit the size and scope of one or more of our independent programs or increase our expenditures and seek additional funding, which may not be available on acceptable terms or at all, and our business may be harmed.

 

55

We do not have the ability to conduct all aspects of our preclinical testing or any future clinical trials ourselves. We are dependent on third parties to conduct the preclinical studies for our product candidates and will depend on third parties to conduct any future clinical trials for our product candidates, and therefore the timing of the initiation and completion of these trials and studies is reliant on third parties and may occur at times substantially different from our estimates or expectations.

In the case of clinical trials, we expect to rely on CROs and third-party collaborators to conduct any future clinical trials in accordance with our clinical protocols and regulatory requirements. We expect our CROs, investigators and third-party collaborators will play a significant role in the conduct of these trials and subsequent collection and analysis of data. There is no guarantee that any CROs, investigators or the other third-party collaborators on which we rely for administration and conduct of our future clinical trials will devote adequate time and resources to such trials or perform as contractually required. If any of these third parties fails to meet expected deadlines, fails to adhere to our clinical protocols, fails to meet regulatory requirements or otherwise performs in a substandard manner, any future clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated. If our current or any of our future clinical trial sites terminates for any reason, we may lose all of the information on subjects enrolled in any such clinical trials.

If we cannot contract with acceptable third parties on commercially reasonable terms, or if these third parties do not carry out their contractual duties, satisfy legal and regulatory requirements for the conduct of preclinical studies or clinical trials or meet expected deadlines, our clinical development programs could be delayed or discontinued.

In all events, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our preclinical studies, and our future clinical trials are conducted in accordance with the general investigational plan and protocols for the study or trial. The FDA requires clinical trials to be conducted in accordance with current GCP, including for conducting, recording and reporting the results of clinical trials to assure that data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the rights and confidentiality of clinical trial participants are protected. Our reliance on third parties that we do not control does not relieve us of these responsibilities and requirements, and any failure to satisfy these responsibilities and requirements, whether caused by us or by third parties upon whom we rely, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We rely on third-party supply and manufacturing partners to manufacture and supply the materials for our research and development and preclinical and clinical study supplies. We do not own manufacturing facilities or supply sources for such materials.

There can be no assurance that our supply of research and development, preclinical and clinical development biologics and other materials will not be limited, interrupted or restricted in certain geographic regions, be of satisfactory quality or continue to be available at acceptable prices. Replacement of a third-party manufacturer could require significant effort, cost and expertise because there may be a limited number of qualified replacements.

The manufacturing process for a product candidate is subject to FDA and foreign regulatory authority review. Suppliers and manufacturers must meet applicable manufacturing requirements and undergo rigorous facility and process validation tests required by regulatory authorities in order to comply with regulatory standards, such as cGMP. In the event that any of our suppliers or manufacturers fails to comply with such requirements or to perform its obligations to us in relation to quality, timing or otherwise, or if our supply of components or other materials becomes limited or interrupted for other reasons, we may be forced to manufacture the materials ourselves or enter into an agreement with another third party, which would be costly and delay any future clinical trials.

 

56

In some cases, the technical skills or technology required to manufacture our product candidates may be unique or proprietary to the original manufacturer and we may have difficulty, or there may be contractual restrictions prohibiting us from, transferring such skills or technology to another third party. These factors increase our reliance on our manufacturers and may require us to obtain a license from a manufacturer in order to have another third-party manufacture our product candidates. If we are required to change manufacturers for any reason, we will be required to verify that the new manufacturer maintains facilities and procedures that comply with quality standards and with all applicable regulations and guidelines of the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities. The delays and costs associated with the verification of a new manufacturer could increase our costs and delay the development of our product candidates.

We expect to continue to rely on third-party manufacturers for preclinical and clinical grade product candidates and if we receive regulatory approval for any product candidate. To the extent that we have existing, or enter into future, manufacturing arrangements with third parties, we will depend on these third parties to perform their obligations in a timely manner consistent with contractual and regulatory requirements, including those related to quality control and assurance. If we are unable to obtain or maintain third-party manufacturing for product candidates, or to do so on commercially reasonable terms, we may not be able to develop and commercialize our product candidates successfully. Our or a third party’s failure to execute on our manufacturing requirements could adversely affect our business in a number of ways, including:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Our third-party manufacturers may be subject to damage or interruption from, among other things, fire, natural or man-made disaster, power loss, telecommunications failure, unauthorized entry, computer viruses, denial-of-service attacks, acts of terrorism, human error, vandalism or sabotage, financial insolvency, bankruptcy and similar events. These risks include the impact of the current COVID-19 pandemic. The extent to which COVID-19 may impact our third party partners will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted, including new information which may emerge concerning the severity of the coronavirus, the geographic spread of the disease, the duration of the outbreak, and the actions to contain the coronavirus or treat its impact, including travel and other social distancing restrictions in the United States and other countries, among others.

Our ability to receive payments under any out-license and collaboration agreements depends on our ability to clearly delineate our rights under those agreements. We have licensed and may license additional portions of our intellectual property to our collaborators with the intent that our collaborators will develop product candidates based on our ddRNAi or other technology to address specific conditions. However, a collaborator may use our intellectual property without our permission, dispute our ownership of intellectual property rights, or argue that our intellectual property does not cover, or add value to, any product candidates they develop. If a dispute arises, it may result in costly patent office procedures and litigation, and our collaborator may refuse to pay us while the dispute is ongoing. Furthermore, regardless of any resort to legal action, a dispute with a collaborator over

 

57

intellectual property rights may damage our relationship with that collaborator and may also harm our reputation in the industry. Even if we are entitled to payments from our collaborators, we may not actually receive these payments, or we may experience difficulties in collecting the payments to which we believe we are entitled. After our collaborators launch commercial products containing our licensed traits, we will need to rely on the good faith of our collaborators to report to us the sales they earn from these products and to accurately calculate the payments we are entitled to, a process that will involve complicated and difficult calculations. Although we seek to address these concerns in our license and collaboration agreements by reserving our right to audit financial records, such provisions may not be effective.

We have limited experience in filing and prosecuting the applications necessary to gain regulatory approvals for gene therapy or ddRNAi product candidates. Moreover, the product candidates that are likely to result from our development programs are based on novel technologies that have not been extensively tested in humans. The regulatory requirements governing these types of product candidates may be less well defined or more rigorous than for conventional products. As a result, we may experience a longer regulatory process in connection with obtaining regulatory approvals of any products that we develop. We intend to rely on independent consultants for purposes of our regulatory compliance and product development and approvals in the United States and elsewhere. Any failure by our consultants to properly advise us regarding, or properly perform tasks related to, regulatory compliance requirements could compromise our ability to develop and seek regulatory approval of our product candidates.

Because we rely on third parties to manufacture our product candidates, and because we collaborate with various organizations and academic institutions on the advancement of our technology and product candidates, we may, at times, share trade secrets with them. We seek to protect our proprietary technology in part by entering into confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, material transfer agreements, collaborative research agreements, consulting agreements or other similar agreements with our collaborators, advisors, employees and consultants prior to beginning research or disclosing proprietary information. These agreements typically limit the rights of the third parties to use or disclose our confidential information, such as trade secrets. Despite these contractual provisions, the need to share trade secrets and other confidential information increases the risk that such trade secrets become known by potential competitors, are inadvertently incorporated into the technology of others, or are disclosed or used in violation of these agreements. Given that our proprietary position is based, in part, on our know-how and trade secrets, discovery by a third party of our trade secrets or other unauthorized use or disclosure would impair our intellectual property rights and protections in our product candidates.

In addition, these agreements typically restrict the ability of our collaborators, advisors, employees and consultants to publish data potentially relating to our trade secrets. Our academic collaborators typically have rights to publish data, provided that we are notified in advance and may delay publication for a specified time in order to secure our intellectual property rights arising from the collaboration. In other cases, publication rights are controlled exclusively by us or we may share these rights with other parties. Despite our efforts to protect our trade secrets, our competitors may discover our trade secrets, either through breach of these agreements, independent development or publication of information including our trade secrets in cases where we do not have proprietary or otherwise protected rights at the time of publication.

 

58

We have not yet secured manufacturing capabilities for commercial quantities of our product candidates or established facilities in the desired locations to support commercialization of our product candidates. We intend to rely on third-party manufacturers for commercialization, but have not entered into any agreements with such manufacturers to support our product candidates currently in development. We may be unable to negotiate agreements with third-party manufacturers to support our commercialization activities on commercially reasonable terms.

We may encounter technical or scientific issues related to manufacturing or development that we may be unable to resolve in a timely manner or with available funds. Currently, we do not have the capacity to manufacture our product candidates on a commercial scale. In addition, our product candidates are novel, and only one manufacturer currently has experience producing our product candidates on a large scale. If we are unable to engage manufacturing partners to produce our product candidates on a larger scale on reasonable terms, our commercialization efforts will be harmed.

Even if we timely develop a manufacturing process and successfully transfer it to the third-party manufacturers

of our product candidates, if such third-party manufacturers are unable to produce the necessary quantities of our product candidates, or do so in compliance with cGMP or with pertinent foreign regulatory requirements, and within our planned time frame and cost parameters, the development and sales of our product candidates, if approved, may be impaired. In some jurisdictions, approval of the manufacturer may be required. There is no guarantee such approval can be obtained.

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

Even if we obtain approval for a product candidate, we may not generate or sustain revenue from sales of the product if the product cannot be sold at a competitive cost or if it fails to achieve market acceptance by

 

59

physicians, patients, third-party payers or others in the medical community. These market participants may be hesitant to adopt a novel treatment based on ddRNAi or silence and replace technology, and we may not be able to convince the medical community and third-party payers to accept and use, or to provide favorable reimbursement for, any product candidates developed by us or our existing or future collaborators. Market acceptance of our product candidates will depend on, among other factors:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

60

Risks Related to Our Business Operations

Our current laboratory operations are located in our facility situated in Hayward, California. Any unplanned event, such as flood, fire, explosion, earthquake, extreme weather condition, medical epidemics, including the current COVID-19 pandemic, power shortage, telecommunication failure or other natural or manmade accidents or incidents that result in us being unable to fully utilize the facility, may compromise our ability to operate our business, particularly on a daily basis, cause us financial losses and inhibit or delay our continued development of our product candidates. Loss of access to this facility may result in increased costs, delays in the development of our product candidates or interruption of our business operations. As part of our risk management policy, we maintain insurance coverage at levels that we believe are appropriate for our business. However, in the event of an accident or incident at this facility, we cannot assure you that the amounts of insurance will be sufficient to satisfy any damages and losses. If our facility is unable to operate because of an accident or incident or for any other reason, even for a short period of time, any or all of our research and development programs may be harmed. Any business interruption may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and prospects.

As of June 30, 2022, we had $4.1 million in cash and cash equivalents. We historically have invested substantially all of our available cash and cash equivalents in cash deposits meeting the criteria of our investment policy, which is focused on the preservation of our capital. These investments are subject to general credit, liquidity, market and interest rate risks. We may realize losses in the fair value of these investments, which would have a negative effect on our financial results. In addition, should our investments cease paying or reduce the amount of interest paid to us, our interest income would suffer. The market risks associated with our investment portfolio may have an adverse effect on our results of operations, liquidity and financial condition.

We rely upon a combination of patents, know-how, trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements—both that we own or possess or that are owned or controlled by our licensors and licensed to us—to protect the intellectual property related to our technology and product candidates.

The patent application process, also known as patent prosecution, is expensive and time-consuming, and we and our current or future licensors and licensees may not be able to prepare, file, and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. It is also possible that we or our current licensors or licensees, or any future licensors or licensees, will fail to identify or obtain sufficient protection for patentable aspects of inventions made in the course of development and commercialization activities before it is too late to obtain patent protection on them. Therefore, our patents and patent applications may not be prosecuted and enforced in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business. It is possible that defects of form in the preparation or filing of our patents or patent applications may exist, or may arise in the future, for example with respect to proper priority claims, inventorship, claim scope, patent term adjustments, etc., although we are unaware of any such defects. If we or our current licensors or licensees, or any future licensors or licensees, fail to establish, maintain or protect such patents and other intellectual property rights, such rights may be reduced or eliminated. If our current licensors or licensees, or any future licensors or licensees, are not fully cooperative or disagree with us as to the prosecution, maintenance or enforcement of any patent rights, such patent rights could be compromised. If there are material defects in the form or preparation of our patents or patent applications,

 

71

such patents or applications may be invalid and unenforceable in circumstances where it is not possible to remedy those material defects. Any of these outcomes could impair our ability to prevent competition from third parties, which may have an adverse impact on our business.

The strength of patents in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical field involves complex legal and scientific questions and can be uncertain. The patent applications that we own or in-license may fail to result in issued patents with claims that cover our product candidates in the United States or other jurisdictions. In addition, we cannot guarantee that any patents will issue from any pending or future patent applications owned by or licensed to us. There is no assurance that all of the potentially relevant prior art relating to our patents and patent applications has been found. If such prior art exists, it can invalidate a patent or prevent a patent from issuing from a pending patent application. Even if patents do successfully issue and even if such patents cover our product candidates, third parties may initiate opposition, interference, re-examination, post-grant review, inter parties review, nullification or derivation action in court or before patent offices or similar proceedings challenging the validity, enforceability or scope of such patents, which may result in the patent claims being narrowed or invalidated. Furthermore, even if our patents and patent applications are unchallenged, they may not adequately protect our intellectual property, provide exclusivity for our product candidates or prevent others from designing around our claims. Any of these outcomes could impair our ability to prevent competition from third parties.

If the patent applications we hold or have in-licensed with respect to our programs or product candidates fail to issue, or are revoked, if the breadth or strength of our patent protection is threatened, or if our patent portfolio fails to provide meaningful exclusivity for our product candidates, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to develop product candidates and threaten our ability to commercialize future products. Any successful opposition to any patents owned by or licensed to us could deprive us of rights necessary for the successful commercialization of any product candidates that we may develop. Further, if we encounter delays in regulatory approvals, the period of time during which we could market a product candidate under patent protection could be reduced. Since patent applications in the United States and most other countries are confidential for a period of time (up to 18 months) after filing, we cannot be certain that we or our licensors were the first to file any patent application related to a product candidate. Furthermore, if third parties have filed such patent applications before March 16, 2013, an interference proceeding in the United States can be initiated by such third parties to determine who was the first to invent any of the subject matter covered by the patent claims of our applications. If third parties have filed such applications on or after March 16, 2013, a derivation proceeding in the United States can be initiated by such third parties to determine whether our invention was derived from theirs. Even where we have a valid and enforceable patent, we may not be able to exclude others from practicing our invention where the other party can show that they used the invention in commerce before our filing date or the other party benefits from a compulsory license. In addition, patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, and in most other jurisdictions with a patent system, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years after its 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 for a product, we may be open to competition from competitive medications, including biosimilar or generic medications. This risk is material in light of the length of the development process of our products and lifespan of our current patent portfolio.

In addition to the protection afforded by patents, we rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect proprietary know-how that is not patentable or that we elect not to patent, processes for which patents are difficult to enforce and any other elements of our product candidate discovery and development processes that involve proprietary know-how, information or technology that is not covered by patents. However, trade secrets can be difficult to protect. What constitutes a trade secret and what protections are available for trade secrets varies from state to state in the United States and country by country worldwide. We seek to protect our proprietary technology and processes, in part, by entering into confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, scientific advisors and contractors. We also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our data and trade secrets by measures designed to maintain the physical security of our

 

72

premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems. Security measures may be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies for any breach. In addition, our trade secrets may otherwise become known to or be independently discovered by competitors. Although we expect all of our employees and consultants to assign their inventions to us, and all of our employees, consultants, advisors and any third parties who have access to our proprietary know-how, information or technology to enter into confidentiality agreements, we cannot provide any assurances that all such agreements have been duly executed, that our trade secrets and other confidential proprietary information will not be disclosed or that competitors will not otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or independently develop substantially equivalent information and techniques. Misappropriation or unauthorized disclosure of our trade secrets can be difficult to detect, could impair our competitive position and may have a material adverse effect on our business. Additionally, if the steps taken to maintain our trade secrets are deemed inadequate, we may have insufficient recourse against third parties for misappropriating the trade secret. In addition, others may independently discover our trade secrets and proprietary information. For example, the FDA, as part of its Transparency Initiative, is currently considering whether to make additional information publicly available on a routine basis, including information that we may consider to be trade secrets or other proprietary information, and it is not clear at the present time how the FDA’s disclosure policies may change in the future, if at all.

Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret is difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. Further, the laws of some foreign countries such as India and China do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent or in the same manner as the laws of the United States. As a result, we may encounter significant problems in protecting and defending our intellectual property both in the United States and abroad. If we are unable to prevent material disclosure of the non-patented intellectual property related to our technologies to third parties, and there is no guarantee that we will have any such enforceable trade secret protection, we may not be able to establish or maintain a competitive advantage in our markets.

We have in-licensed certain intellectual property from third parties, including technology related to ddRNAi and antisense RNA. In some cases, our licenses to intellectual property are non-exclusive and the licensors may license the technology to our competitors in the same field, which may result is significant competition for us. In other cases, our licenses to intellectual property are exclusive only for a specific field of use (such as human therapeutics), and the licensors retain rights to practice the licensed intellectual property themselves and to grant licenses to third parties in other fields. Such third parties may develop improvements to the licensed intellectual property that are not licensed to us, which could block our ability to continue developing the product candidate covered by the licensed intellectual property, unless we negotiate a license. Such third parties may also disclose competitively-sensitive information about the licensed intellectual property that diminishes its value. In other cases, our licenses are for research purposes only. Upon regulatory marketing approval of our product candidates it may be necessary for us to obtain a broader license in order to commercialize. We cannot guarantee the availability of the broader license or that it can be obtained on commercially reasonable terms.

We rely on some of these third party licensors to file and prosecute patent applications and maintain patents and otherwise protect the intellectual property we license. We have not had and do not have primary control over these activities for certain of our patents or patent applications and other intellectual property rights we license, and therefore cannot guarantee that these patents and applications will be prosecuted or enforced in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business. We cannot be certain that such activities by third parties have been or will be conducted in compliance with applicable laws and regulations or will result in valid and enforceable patents and other intellectual property rights. Additionally, we may not be able to control the publication or other disclosures of research carried out by our licensors relating to technology that could otherwise prove patentable. Pursuant to the terms of some of our license agreements with third parties, some of our third-party licensors have the right, but not the obligation, to control enforcement of our licensed patents or

 

73

defense of any claims asserting the invalidity of these patents. Even if we are permitted to pursue such enforcement or defense, we will require the cooperation of our licensors, and cannot guarantee that we would receive it and on what terms. We cannot be certain that our licensors will allocate sufficient resources or prioritize their or our prosecution or enforcement of such patents or defense of such claims to protect our interests in the licensed patents. If we cannot obtain patent protection, or enforce existing or future patents against third parties, our competitive position and our financial condition could suffer.

We hold rights under license or sublicense agreements with third parties that are important to our business. Under our existing license and sublicense agreements, we are subject to various obligations, including diligence obligations with respect to development and commercialization activities and payment obligations. In spite of our efforts, our licensors may conclude that we have materially breached our obligations under such license agreements and terminate the license agreements, thereby removing or limiting our ability to develop and commercialize product candidates and technology covered by these license agreements.

We may need to obtain additional licenses from third parties to advance our research or allow commercialization of our product candidates, such as if we identify new technology that would advance our programs or if an existing license agreement is terminated. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to develop or license replacement technology. If we are unable to do so, we may be unable to develop or commercialize the affected product candidates.

In many cases, patent prosecution of our in-licensed technology is controlled solely by the licensor. If our licensors fail to obtain and maintain patent or other protection for the proprietary intellectual property we license from them, we could lose our rights to the intellectual property or our exclusivity with respect to those rights, and our competitors could market competing products using the intellectual property. In some cases, we control the prosecution of patents resulting from licensed technology. In the event we breach any of our obligations related to such prosecution, we may incur significant liability to our licensing partners and the value of the licensed patents may be adversely affected.

Licensing of intellectual property is of critical importance to our business and involves complex legal, business and scientific issues and is complicated by the rapid pace of scientific discovery in our industry. Disputes may arise regarding intellectual property subject to a licensing agreement, including:

 

 

 

 

 

 

If disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates.

 

74

We are a party to license agreements that require us to remit royalty payments and other payments related to in-licensed intellectual property. Under our in-license agreements, we may pay up-front fees and milestone payments and be subject to future royalties. We cannot precisely predict the amount, if any, of royalties we will owe in the future, and if our calculations of royalty payments are incorrect, we may owe additional royalties, which could negatively affect our results of operations. As our product sales increase, we may, from time to time, disagree with our third-party collaborators as to the appropriate royalties owed, and the resolution of such disputes may be costly, may consume management’s time, and may damage our relationship with our collaborators. Furthermore, we may enter into additional license agreements in the future, which may also include royalty, milestone and other payments.

Some of the out-licenses we may grant to our collaborators to use our ddRNAi and other technology may be exclusive to the development of product candidates for certain conditions, so long as our collaborators comply with certain requirements. That means that once our ddRNAi technology is licensed to a collaborator for a specified condition, we are generally prohibited from developing product candidates for that condition and from licensing the ddRNAi to any third party for that condition. The limitations imposed by these exclusive licenses could prevent us from expanding our business and increasing our development of product candidates with new collaborators, both of which could adversely affect our business and results of operations.

Our commercial success depends in part on our avoiding infringement of the patents and proprietary rights of third parties. There is a substantial amount of litigation, both within and outside the United States, involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, including patent infringement lawsuits, interferences, oppositions and inter parties review proceedings before the USPTO, and corresponding foreign patent offices. Numerous U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications, which are owned by third parties, exist in the fields in which we are pursuing development candidates. As the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries expand and more patents are issued, the risk increases that our product candidates may be subject to claims of infringement of the patent rights of third parties.

Third parties may assert that we are employing their proprietary technology without authorization. There may be third-party patents or patent applications with claims to materials, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods for treatment related to the use or manufacture of our product candidates. Because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending patent applications which may later result in issued patents that our product candidates may be accused of infringing. In addition, third parties may obtain patents in the future and claim that use of our technologies infringes upon these patents. If any third-party patents were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover the manufacturing process, methods of use or formulations of any of our product candidates, any DNA constructs formed during the manufacturing process or any final product itself, the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to commercialize such product candidate unless we obtained a license under the applicable patents, or until such patents expire. In either case, such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all.

Parties making claims against us may obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could effectively block our ability to further develop and commercialize one or more of our product candidates. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of management and employee resources from our business. In the event of a successful claim of infringement

 

75

against us, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, pay royalties, redesign our infringing products or obtain one or more licenses from third parties, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. Even if a license can be obtained on acceptable terms, the rights may be non-exclusive, which could give our competitors access to the same technology or intellectual property rights licensed to us. If we fail to obtain a required license, we may be unable to effectively market product candidates based on our technology, which could limit our ability to generate revenue or achieve profitability and possibly prevent us from generating revenue sufficient to sustain our operations.

Presently, we have certain rights to intellectual property to develop our current gene therapy product candidates. However, our product candidates may require specific formulations to work effectively and efficiently and rights to such formulations may be held by others. In addition, we may need additional intellectual property rights as we develop future product candidates. In particular, we are aware of a third party patent directed to AAV vectors that expires in 2026. In the event we receive regulatory marketing approval before the expiration date it may be necessary for us to obtain a license to the patent in order to commercialize. We cannot guarantee the availability of the license or that it can be obtained on commercially reasonable terms.

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 on terms that we find acceptable, or at all. The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and a number of more established companies are also pursuing strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, cash resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities.

For example, we sometimes collaborate with U.S. and foreign academic institutions to accelerate our preclinical research or development under written agreements with these institutions. Typically, these institutions provide us with an option to negotiate a license to any of the institution’s rights in technology resulting from the collaboration. Regardless of such right of first negotiation for intellectual property, we may be unable to negotiate a license within the specified time frame or under terms that are acceptable to us. If we are unable to do so, the institution may offer the intellectual property rights to other parties, potentially blocking our ability to pursue our program.

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. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third- party intellectual property rights, our business, financial condition and prospects for growth could suffer.

Competitors may infringe our patents or the patents of our licensors. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. In addition, in an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours or our licensors is not valid, is unenforceable or is not infringed, or may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology in question. An adverse result in any litigation or defense proceedings could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing.

 

76

For example, in patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, for example, lack of novelty, obviousness or non-enablement. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could be an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant information from the USPTO, or made a misleading statement, during prosecution. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability during patent litigation is unpredictable. With respect to the validity question, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art, of which we and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. Third parties may also raise similar claims before administrative bodies in the United States or abroad, even outside the context of litigation. Such mechanisms include re-examination, post grant review, and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions, such as opposition proceedings. Such proceedings could result in revocation, amendments to our patent claims or statements being made on the record such that our claims may no longer be construed to cover our product candidates. Outcomes or statements on the record in one country could have a disadvantageous effect on prosecution or enforcement of a patent or patent application in another country. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. With respect to the validity question, for example, we cannot be certain that no invalidating prior art exists or that the patent examiner was aware of all material prior art during prosecution. Moreover, in some circumstances, we do not have the right to control the preparation, filing and prosecution of patent applications, or to maintain, enforce or defend the patents, covering technology that we license from third parties. Therefore, these patents and applications may not be prosecuted, enforced and defended in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity or unenforceability, we could lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on one or more of our products or certain aspects of our platform technology. Such a loss of patent protection could have a material adverse impact on our business. Patents and other intellectual property rights also will not protect our technology if competitors design around our protected technology without legally infringing our patents or other intellectual property rights. Even if resolved in our favor, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims may cause us to incur significant expenses and could distract our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. In addition, enforcement of a favorable decision by a court can depend on cooperation of a governmental authority which may or may not be available in every jurisdiction. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing or distribution activities.

For our patents and patent applications filed in the United States before March 16, 2013, interference proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by us may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions with respect to our patents or patent applications or those of our licensors. An unfavorable outcome could require us to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights to it from the prevailing party. Our business could be harmed if the prevailing party does not offer us a license on commercially reasonable terms. Litigation or interference proceedings may result in a decision adverse to our interests and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distract our management and other employees. We may not be able to prevent, alone or with our licensors, misappropriation of our intellectual property rights, particularly in countries where the laws may not protect those rights as fully as in the United States.

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could cause the trading price of our common stock to fall.

Certain of our key employees and personnel are or were previously employed at universities, medical institutions or other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors.

 

77

Although we try to ensure that our employees, consultants and independent contractors do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we or our employees, consultants or independent contractors have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any of our employee’s former employer or other third parties. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. Furthermore, universities or medical institutions who employ some of our key employees and personnel in parallel to their engagement by us may claim that intellectual property developed by such person is owned by the respective academic or medical institution under the respective institution intellectual property policy or applicable law. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs, be a distraction to management and other employees, and damage our relationships with the academic and medical institutions.

We may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an ownership interest in our patents or other intellectual property. We may in the future have ownership disputes arising, for example, from conflicting obligations of consultants or others who are involved in developing our product candidates. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship or ownership. 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.

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other governmental fees on patents and applications are required to be paid to the USPTO and various governmental patent agencies outside of the United States in several stages over the lifetime of the patents and applications. The USPTO and various corresponding governmental patent agencies outside of the United States require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process and after a patent has issued. There are situations in which non-compliance 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.

As is the case with other biotechnology companies, our success is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the biotechnology industry involve both technological and legal complexity, and it therefore is costly, time-consuming and inherently uncertain. In addition, on September 16, 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the Leahy-Smith Act, was signed into law. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law, including provisions that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation.

An important change introduced by the Leahy-Smith Act is that, as of March 16, 2013, the United States transitioned to a “first-to-file” system for deciding which party should be granted a patent when two or more patent applications are filed by different parties claiming the same invention. A third party that files a patent application in the USPTO after that date but before us could therefore be awarded a patent covering an invention

 

78

of ours even if we had made the invention before it was made by the third party. This will require us to be cognizant going forward of the time from invention to filing of a patent application. It is not clear what, if any, impact the Leahy-Smith Act will have on the operation of our business. However, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents.

Among some of the other changes introduced by the Leahy-Smith Act are changes that limit where a patentee may file a patent infringement suit and providing opportunities for third parties to challenge any issued patent in the USPTO. This applies to all of our U.S. patents, even those issued before March 16, 2013. Because of a lower evidentiary standard in USPTO proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in U.S. federal court 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. Accordingly, a third party may attempt to use the USPTO procedures to invalidate our patent claims that would not have been invalidated if first challenged by the third party as a defendant in a district court action.

Recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings such as Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. (Myriad I); BRCA1- & BRCA2-Based Hereditary Cancer Test Patent Litig. (Myriad II); and Promega Corp. v. Life Technologies Corp. have also narrowed the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances and weakened the rights of patent owners in some situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on decisions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts, and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future.

Our commercial success depends, in part, on our ability to obtain and maintain patent and trade secret protection for our technologies, our traits, and their uses, as well as our ability to operate without infringing upon the proprietary rights of others outside the United States. If we do not adequately protect our intellectual property, competitors may be able to use our technologies and erode or negate any competitive advantage we may have, which could harm our business and ability to achieve profitability.

Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on product candidates in all countries around the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States can be less extensive than those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States. In addition, we may at times in-license third-party technologies for which limited international patent protection exists and for which the time period for filing international patent applications has passed. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Potential competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our product candidates, if approved, and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology products, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or

 

79

marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license.

The market price of our common stock may be highly volatile and subject to wide fluctuations. In addition, the trading volume of our common stock may fluctuate and cause significant price variations to occur. If the market price of our common stock declines significantly, you may be unable to resell your shares of our common stock at or above your purchase price, if at all. We cannot assure you that the market price of our common stock will not fluctuate or significantly decline in the future.

Some specific factors that could negatively affect the price of our common stock or result in fluctuations in its price and trading volume include:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In addition, the stock market has experienced and is currently experiencing significant volatility, particularly with respect to pharmaceutical, biotechnology and other life sciences company stocks. The volatility of

pharmaceutical, biotechnology and other life sciences company stocks often does not relate to the operating performance of the companies represented by the stock.

Although our common stock is listed on Nasdaq, if an active public market in the United States for our common stock does not continue to develop, the market price and liquidity of our common stock may be adversely

 

80

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.

Item 2. Properties.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures.

PART II

Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.

Market Information

Holders

Dividends

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

Use of Proceeds

Purchases of Equity Securities

Item 6. Reserved.

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

You should read the following discussion and analysis of financial condition and operating results together with our consolidated financial statements and the related notes and other financial information included in Item 8 in this Annual Report. This discussion contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. As a result of many factors, such as those set forth in the section of the Annual Report captioned “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this Annual Report, our actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in these forward- looking statements.

Overview

Revenues from customers

Expenses

Other Income (Loss)

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Operating activities

Investing activities

Financing activities

Contractual Obligations and Commercial Commitments

Critical Accounting Policies and Significant Accounting Estimates

Revenue from Contracts with Customers

Licensing revenues

Royalties

Services revenue

Stock Compensation

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

New Accounting Standards and Interpretations not yet mandatory or early adopted

ASU 2016-13

Financial Instruments—Credit

Losses

Financial Instruments-Credit Losses, Derivatives and Hedging, and Leases: Effective Dates”

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk.

Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure.

Item 9A. Controls and Procedures.

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

Internal Control – Integrated Framework

(2013)

Limitations on Effectiveness of Controls and Procedures

Item 9B. Other Information.

Item 9C. Disclosure Regarding Foreign Jurisdictions that Prevent Inspections.

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2020.

Campbell, California

September 2, 202

 

F-3

 

 

F-4

 

 

F-5