Guardant Health, Inc. - Annual Report: 2022 (Form 10-K)

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, DC 20549

_____________________

FORM 10-K

_____________________

(Mark One)

☒ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022

☐ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from to

Commission File Number: 001-38683

_____________________

GUARDANT HEALTH, INC.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

_____________________


Delaware						45-4139254
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)						(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

3100 Hanover Street

Palo Alto, California 94304

(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (855) 698-8887

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


Title of each class	Trading Symbol(s)	Name of each exchange on which registered
Common Stock, par value $0.00001	GH	The Nasdaq Global Select Market

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

None

___________________

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 Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act. Yes ☐ No ☒

If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. Yes ☐ No ☒

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


Large Accelerated Filer	☒	Accelerated Filer	☐

Non-accelerated Filer	☐	Smaller reporting company	☐

Emerging growth company	☐

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 Exchange Act). Yes ☐ No ☒

The aggregate market value of the voting and non‑voting common equity held by non‑affiliates of the registrant, as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter was approximately $4.0 billion (based on the closing price of the registrant’s common stock on the Nasdaq Global Select Market on June 30, 2022 of $40.34 per share).

As of February 17, 2023, the registrant had 102,663,734 shares of common stock, $0.00001 par value per share, outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the registrant’s definitive proxy statement relating to its annual meeting of stockholders to be held in 2023, or the 2023 Annual Meeting, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC, within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year to which this Annual Report on Form 10-K relates, are incorporated herein by reference where indicated. Except with respect to information specifically incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, such proxy statement is not deemed to be filed as part hereof.

GUARDANT HEALTH, INC.

FORM 10-K

For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2022

TABLE OF CONTENTS


	PART I
		Page
Item 1.	Business	2
Item 1A.	Risk Factors	28
Item 1B.	Unresolved Staff Comments	79
Item 2.	Properties	79
Item 3.	Legal Proceedings	79
Item 4.	Mine Safety Disclosures	79

	PART II

Item 5.	Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities	79
Item 6.	[Reserved]	80
Item 7.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	80
Item 7A.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk	99
Item 8.	Financial Statements and Supplementary Data	100
Item 9.	Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure	144
Item 9A.	Controls and Procedures	144
Item 9B.	Other Information	145
Item 9C.	Disclosure Regarding Foreign Jurisdictions that Prevent Inspections	146

	PART III

Item 10.	Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance	147
Item 11.	Executive Compensation	147
Item 12.	Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters	147
Item 13.	Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence	147
Item 14.	Principal Accounting Fees and Services	147

	PART IV

Item 15.	Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules	147
Item 16.	Form 10-K Summary	150
	Signatures

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K, including the sections titled “Business” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” contains forward-looking statements regarding future events and our future results that are based on our current expectations, estimates, forecasts and projections about our business, our results of operations, the industry in which we operate and the beliefs and assumptions of our management. Words such as “believe,” “may,” “will,” “estimate,” “continue,” “anticipate,” “would,” “could,” “should,” “intend” and “expect,” variations of these words, and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are only predictions and are subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions that are difficult to predict. Therefore, actual results may differ materially and adversely from those expressed in any forward-looking statements. Factors that might cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to, those discussed in Part I, Item 1A,“Risk Factors,” of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and elsewhere herein, and in other reports we file with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC. While forward-looking statements are based on the reasonable expectations of our management at the time that they are made, you should not rely on them. We undertake no obligation to revise or update publicly any forward-looking statements for any reason, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as may be required by law.

Each of the terms the “Company,” “we,” “our,” “us” and similar terms used herein refer collectively to Guardant Health, Inc., a Delaware corporation, and its consolidated subsidiaries, unless otherwise stated.

RISK FACTOR SUMMARY

Our business is subject to numerous risk and uncertainties, including those described in Part I, Item 1A. “Risk Factors” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. You should carefully consider these risks and uncertainties when investing in our common stock, including the full discussion of risks included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The principal risks and uncertainties affecting our business include the following:

•We have incurred significant losses since inception, we may continue to incur losses in the future and we may not be able to generate sufficient revenue to achieve and maintain profitability.

•We may not be able to generate sufficient revenue to achieve and maintain profitability and our current or future products may not achieve or maintain sufficient commercial market acceptance.

•Our operating results may fluctuate significantly, which makes our future operating results difficult to predict and could cause our operating results to fall below expectations or any guidance we may provide.

•New product development and commercialization involve a lengthy and complex process and we may be unable to develop or commercialize new products on a timely basis, or at all.

•Our current revenue is primarily generated from sales of our tests and we are highly dependent on them for our success.

•If our products do not meet the expectations of patients and our customers, our operating results, reputation and business could suffer.

•If we are unable to support demand for our current and future products, including ensuring that we have adequate capacity to meet increased demand, or we are unable to successfully manage our anticipated growth, our business could suffer.

•If we cannot maintain our current relationships, or enter into new relationships, with biopharmaceutical companies, our revenue prospects could be reduced.

•If we cannot compete successfully with our competitors, we may be unable to increase or sustain our revenue or to achieve and then sustain profitability.

•We have experienced challenges attracting and retaining qualified personnel due to competitive labor markets and may continue to do so, and may be unable to manage our future growth effectively, all of which could make it difficult to execute our business strategy.

•We rely on a limited number of suppliers or sole suppliers for some of our laboratory instruments and materials and may not be able to find replacements or promptly transition to alternative suppliers.

•The COVID-19 global pandemic and the worldwide attempts to contain it have adversely impacted our supply chain and other aspects of our business, as well as our results of operations, and could continue to do so.

•We conduct business in a heavily regulated industry, and changes in regulations or violations of regulations may, directly or indirectly, reduce our revenue, adversely affect our operations and financial condition, and harm our business.

•Certain of our tests are currently marketed as laboratory developed tests, or LDTs, and future changes in FDA enforcement discretion for LDTs could subject our product offerings to more significant regulatory requirements.

•If third-party payers, including commercial payers and government healthcare programs, do not provide coverage of, or adequate reimbursement for, our tests, our business and results of operations will be negatively affected.

•Our billing and claim processing are complex and time-consuming, and any delay in submitting claims or failure to comply with applicable billing requirements could hinder collection and have an adverse effect on our revenue.

•Issued patents covering our products, services or technology could be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged.

•The price of our common stock has fluctuated substantially and may do so in the future, and you may not be able to resell shares of our common stock at or above the price at which you purchased them.

•Our indebtedness could expose us to risks that could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations or result in dilution to our stockholders.

PART I

Item 1. Business

Overview

We are a leading precision oncology company focused on helping conquer cancer globally through the use of our proprietary tests, vast data sets and advanced analytics. We believe our tests can transform cancer care by unlocking insights that will help patients at all stages of the disease, including at its earliest stages, when it’s most treatable. For patients with advanced-stage cancer, we have commercially launched Guardant360 laboratory developed test, or LDT, and Guardant360 CDx, the first comprehensive liquid biopsy test approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or the FDA, to provide tumor mutation profiling with solid tumors and to be used as a companion diagnostic in connection with non-small cell lung cancer, or NSCLC, and breast cancer. We have also launched the Guardant360 TissueNext tissue test for advanced-stage cancer, Guardant Reveal blood test to detect residual and recurring disease in early-stage cancer patients, and Guardant360 Response blood test to predict patient response to immunotherapy or targeted therapy eight weeks earlier than current standard-of-care imaging.

We also collaborate with biopharmaceutical companies in clinical studies by providing the above-mentioned tests, as well as the GuardantOMNI blood test for advanced-stage cancer, and the GuardantINFINITY blood test, launched in September 2022, which is a next-generation smart liquid biopsy that provides new, multi-dimensional insights into the complexities of tumor molecular profiles and immune response to advance cancer research and therapy development. Using data collected from our tests, we have also developed our GuardantINFORM platform to help biopharmaceutical companies accelerate precision oncology drug development through the use of this in-silico research platform to unlock further insights into tumor evolution and treatment resistance across various biomarker-driven cancers.

In May 2022, we launched the Shield LDT test to address the needs of individuals eligible for colorectal cancer screening. From a simple blood draw, Shield uses a novel multimodal approach to detect colorectal cancer signals in the bloodstream, including DNA that is shed by tumors. In addition, in December 2022, we announced positive results from ECLIPSE, an over 20,000 patient registrational study evaluating the performance of our Shield blood test for detecting colorectal cancer in average-risk adults. We also expect to expand into lung and multi-cancer screening with our investigational, next-generation Shield assay.

Our strategy

Our objective is to be the leading provider of precision oncology and screening products for cancer management across all stages of the disease and drive commercial adoption of our products. To achieve this, we intend to:

•Increase awareness of our products by:

▪building awareness of liquid biopsy and pioneering a blood-first paradigm for genotyping cancer patients;

▪educating biopharmaceutical companies, key opinion leaders, or KOLs, and advocacy groups;

▪advocating for inclusion of our tests in treatment guidelines; and

▪expanding access to our products globally through direct investment and by leveraging our global network of partners.

•Expand clinical utility and increase reimbursement for our products by:

▪working with private and public payers to establish coverage and reimbursement for our tests;

▪investing in clinical evidence directly and through relationships with academia and biopharmaceutical companies to establish expanded indications for use;

▪demonstrating improved clinical utility and health economics from use of our tests to patients, physicians and payers; and

▪pursuing FDA and other regulatory approval internationally of our tests to facilitate reimbursement and global market access.

•Strengthen our relationships with customers by:

▪demonstrating the utility of our products in connection with standard of care treatments thereby encouraging clinical adoption;

▪developing and seeking approval of our products as companion diagnostics for targeted therapies and immuno-oncology therapies; and

▪providing earlier insights into emerging clinically relevant biomarkers.

•Expand our product portfolio by:

▪using our commercial engine as a force multiplier of returns on research and development investment to generate data and analytical insights to enable development of new products;

▪taking a disciplined and systematic approach to product and market development, by starting with therapy selection and then expanding sequentially towards early cancer detection;

▪utilizing our data, sample biobank and insights into biology of circulating tumor-related biomarkers in blood to develop our new products;

▪building on our regulatory and commercial infrastructure to accelerate new product launches and drive commercial efficiencies; and

▪using our strategic relationships, including our partnerships with European cancer centers and research organizations, to drive global commercialization of our products.

Our products and development program

We have launched various products and programs using our digital sequencing technology, which is enabled by robust, high-efficiency biochemistry at the front-end, next-generation sequencing and a machine learning augmented bioinformatics pipeline. We believe our product portfolio could address the full continuum of cancer care for selected indications, and has utility in both the clinical and biopharmaceutical markets.

Therapy Selection

Guardant360 CDx Test

We believe our Guardant360 CDx test was the first comprehensive liquid biopsy test approved by the FDA, and is the market leading comprehensive liquid biopsy test, based on the number of tests ordered. Our Guardant360 CDx test is a 55-gene test to provide tumor mutation profiling to be used by qualified health professionals in accordance with professional guidelines in oncology for cancer patients with any solid malignant neoplasm. Our Guardant360 CDx test has also been approved by the FDA for use as a companion diagnostic to identify NSCLC patients who may benefit from treatment with TAGRISSO® (osimertinib), RYBREVANTTM (amivantamab-vjmw), LUMAKRASTM (sotorasib) and ENHERTU® (fam-trastuzumab deruxtecan-nxki), and breast cancer patients who may benefit from treatment with ORSERDUTM (elacestrant), marketed by biopharmaceutical companies. Additional gene content and immune-oncology biomarkers (e.g. microsatellite instability, or MSI) are reported in a professional services compendium to the FDA approved CDx report. Results are typically delivered within seven days following receipt of sample and delivered by a clinical report.

Guardant360 LDT

The number of personalized therapy options for advanced cancer patients continues to grow, giving patients who may have cycled through standard of care therapies additional options. Focused on addressing patient care throughout the diagnostic journey, we launched an updated and expanded version of our LDT to support new guideline-recommended biomarkers. Our Guardant360 LDT test measures 80+ cancer-related genes, and has been used over 300,000 times by clinicians to help inform which therapy may be effective for advanced stage cancer patients with solid tumors, without the need to obtain archival tissue or subject the patient to another invasive biopsy. Results are typically delivered, ten days following receipt of sample and delivered by a clinical report.

Guardant360 Response Test

Our Guardant360 Response test, launched as an LDT, is the first blood-only liquid biopsy that enables doctors to view molecular response, or changes in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) levels, from a simple blood draw to potentially gain early insight regarding patient response to treatment. For doctors, knowing early and confidently if a patient’s treatment is working is critical in deciding whether to continue, stop, or explore other options. Studies across cancers and therapies show the Guardant360 Response test predicted treatment response eight weeks earlier than current standard-of-care radiological and imaging scans.

Guardant360 TissueNext Test

To complement our liquid biopsy-based products, we launched Guardant360 TissueNext as an LDT, our first tissue-based test which is designed to identify patients with advanced cancer who may benefit from biomarker-informed treatment. Tissue genotyping is currently widely available to physicians and patients. We believe many tissue genotyping products currently available to physicians and patients have experienced long delays in getting results to physicians and high failure rates because of the inability to obtain enough tissue or high-quality DNA for analysis. Such delay or inability to produce results from tissue genotyping can adversely affect providing the right treatment to patients at the right time. We therefore believe our Guardant360 TissueNext, together with our liquid biopsy-based products, have the potential to help address the challenges with tissue genotyping products currently in the market.

Recurring Monitoring / Minimum Residual Disease

Guardant Reveal Test

In the management of early-stage cancer, current tools do not identify all high-risk patients who will benefit from adjuvant therapy or detect recurrence early enough when it is most curable. We plan to address this need, first in early-stage colorectal, breast and lung cancers, with our Guardant Reveal test launched as an LDT for residual disease and recurrence monitoring. We believe the Guardant Reveal test has the potential to enable oncologists to improve the care of early-stage cancer patients by correctly identifying more high-risk patients than clinicopathologic review alone and by detecting recurrent disease months earlier than current standard of care methods like imaging carcinoembryonic antigen tests. We believe the Guardant Reveal test can improve turnaround by simultaneously interrogating both genomic and epigenomic signals from a single blood draw without the need for tissue. Similar to our data development effort for our Guardant360 tests, we are investing heavily in establishing clinical utility for the use of Guardant Reveal in adjuvant treatment settings. We also believe our Guardant Reveal test may help biopharmaceutical companies identify new drug development opportunities. In return, these relationships could help us establish clinical utility for our tests and create new testing opportunities related to emerging therapies.

Screening

Shield Test

According to American Cancer Society: Colorectal Cancer Facts & Figures 2020-2022, it is estimated that only 66% of adults at 50 years and older are screened despite compelling evidence that routine cancer screening can reduce colorectal cancer mortality, the second leading cause of cancer death. Therefore, we believe that there is a critical need to develop products to expand precision oncology to earlier stage cancer settings. These products could enable clinicians to precisely detect, and intervene in the disease evolution when the disease is more likely to be curable, key to significantly improving patient clinical outcomes. In order to systematically address this need, in May 2022, we launched the Shield LDT test to address the needs of individuals eligible for colorectal cancer screening. From a simple blood draw, Shield uses a novel multimodal approach to detect colorectal cancer signals in the bloodstream, including DNA that is shed by tumors. Our research and development results to date indicate that somatic signatures alone may be insufficient for detection of early-stage cancers with high sensitivity. For this reason, we have incorporated epigenomic signatures to enhance the performance of our Shield assay in these settings. In addition, in December 2022, we announced positive results from ECLIPSE, an over 20,000 patient registrational study evaluating the performance of our Shield blood test for detecting colorectal cancer in average-risk adults. The test demonstrated 83% sensitivity in detecting individuals with colorectal cancer. Specificity was 90% in both individuals without advanced neoplasia and in those who had a negative colonoscopy result. These results exceed the performance criteria set forth by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, for reimbursement. This test also demonstrated 13% sensitivity in detecting advanced adenomas. Based on these study results, we plan to complete our premarket approval, or PMA, submission to the FDA in the first quarter of 2023.

We also expect to expand into lung and multi-cancer screening with our investigational, next-generation Shield assay. To clinically validate the performance of our next-generation Shield blood test in detecting lung cancer in high-risk individuals ages 50-80, in January 2022, we enrolled the first patient in a nearly 10,000-patient prospective, registrational study, which we refer to as the SHIELD LUNG study. The study is anticipated to run in approximately 100 centers in the United States and Europe. We believe that developing a blood test for early detection of cancer requires a vast amount of molecular and clinical data across all stages of the disease in order to better understand the biology and clinical relevance of tumor-specific biomarkers in blood. While we believe the benefits of early detection on clinical outcomes are widely known, early detection may also benefit biopharmaceutical companies by identifying a much larger at-risk population who may benefit from early therapeutic intervention or from preventative medicines.

Biopharmaceutical Offerings

GuardantOMNI Test

Our GuardantOMNI test has a significantly larger genomic panel footprint than the Guardant360 LDT test and has achieved comparable analytical performance in clinical studies, including for translational science applications in collaboration with several biopharmaceutical companies. It covers 500 genes, including genes associated with homologous recombination repair deficiency and biomarkers for immuno-oncology applications, such as tumor mutational burden and microsatellite instability.

In order to preserve performance characteristics of our Guardant360 LDT test across a broader gene panel, we implemented additional enhancements to the assay efficiency and bioinformatics analysis to improve the sensitivity of our GuardantOMNI test. These enhancements are critical in the context of using the GuardantOMNI test in the retrospective testing of clinical study samples for translational science applications in collaboration with biopharmaceutical customers, as those samples are often available with only a limited volume of plasma.

Validation data indicates that the GuardantOMNI test exceeds the Guardant360 LDT test’s sensitivity for detecting clinically actionable biomarkers. At the same time, broader panel-wide performance of small variants is roughly similar to that of Guardant360 LDT test. The broad genomic footprint of our GuardantOMNI test enables accurate measurement of tumor mutational burden.

GuardantINFINITY Test

In September 2022, we launched GuardantINFINITY, a next-generation smart liquid biopsy test that provides new, multi-dimensional insights into the complexities of tumor molecular profiles and immune response to advance cancer research and therapy development. Our GuardantINFINITY assay provides a more comprehensive molecular profile of tumors than earlier assays, giving researchers access to novel genomic and epigenomic insights to provide a simultaneously deeper and more complete understanding of a tumor’s biology, its system-wide interactions and the associated immune response in a range of applications, from therapy selection to molecular response and longitudinal monitoring. The assay’s extensive methylome panel helps identify the unique methylation pattern that each tumor delivers, providing an important new dimension of research insights that has been largely unexplored in clinical development to date. GuardantINFINITY is available as a single modular assay with flexible configurations that can be tailored to fit a current application, along with the ability to unlock additional content modules at any time, without incurring the burden or delay of additional sample collection. The core module offers genotyping coverage of more than 800 genes with sample-level methylation detection and tumor fraction score for biomarker discovery, clinical research, therapy selection and response monitoring.

GuardantConnect

Because cancer patients often exhaust standard of care treatment options as the disease progresses and guidelines recommend clinical studies for cancer patients, clinical study matching is an acute need in oncology. At the same time, biopharmaceutical companies need to fill clinical studies that require screening hundreds of thousands of patients. Despite these needs, clinical study enrollment in oncology has severely lagged, with only approximately 8% of cancer patients enrolling in clinical studies. GuardantConnect is our integrated software-based solution designed for our clinical and biopharmaceutical customers, seeking to connect patients tested with our assays with actionable alterations with potentially relevant clinical studies.

GuardantINFORM

In June 2020, we launched GuardantINFORM, our real-world evidence platform featuring an extensive clinical-genomic dataset of advanced cancer patients. The GuardantINFORM platform is intended to help accelerate research and development of the next generation of cancer therapeutics by offering biopharmaceutical partners an in silico resource that combines de-identified longitudinal clinical information and genomic data collected from our tests. This robust dataset offers real-world insights into anti-cancer therapy use and associated outcomes, and molecular drivers of treatment response and resistance for over 60 advanced cancers including non-small cell lung, breast, colon, and prostate. Applications for the GuardantINFORM platform cover research and development, clinical study planning and modelling, and commercial applications.

Smart Liquid Biopsy Platform

Our smart liquid biopsy platform drives significant research and development efficiencies and operating leverage, which supports performance improvements, cross-development of new applications, cost savings and improved turnaround time. While products continue to evolve by leveraging commonality in equipment, reagents, and staffing, this platform also provides a foundation for future product evolutions and data integration. We expect to migrate our products to the platform and we believe our smart liquid biopsy platform has the potential to unlock the power of the epigenome, broaden the view of what drives cancer biology, and provide industry leading high-sensitivity genomic and epigenomic detection at ultra-high specificity and low cost.

Guardant Galaxy

Our Guardant Galaxy suite of advanced analytical technologies have been developed internally and through outside partnerships to enhance the performance and clinical utility of our portfolio of cancer tests, and to power the next generation of biomarker and drug discovery. The first application in the Guardant Galaxy suite is an AI-backed digital pathology platform developed by Lunit®, for the enhanced Guardant360 TissueNext PD-L1 test, which improves detection of the cancer biomarker compared to manual pathologist interpretation in NSCLC cases. Future planned applications include deep learning-driven genomic, epigenomic and spatial biomarker discovery via collaboration with biopharmaceutical partners and integration with GuardantINFORM real-world clinical data platform.

Clinical Studies and Publications

The goal of our clinical development with our tests is to support its use for comprehensive genomic profiling across multiple tumor types, including as a preferred alternative to tissue testing to inform first line treatment right after diagnosis and at time of disease progression. We publish peer-reviewed studies in order to influence treatment guidelines, to educate clinicians and other oncology stakeholders about the value proposition of our test and to set the stage for reimbursement with private and public payers. We have over 90 targeted therapy outcomes studies, more than 300 peer-reviewed publications and more than 700 scientific abstracts. We are proactively pursuing studies to support the use of our tests as a preferred alternative to tissue testing to inform first line treatment right after diagnosis, with the goal to provide evidence that our tests detect genomic alterations at a similar rate compared to standard of care tissue testing in the United States, Europe and Asia. Such a strategy is predicated on the tests’ ability to offer accurate, reliable and fast guideline-directed comprehensive genotyping for all adult solid tumors without exposing patients to invasive biopsy procedures’ risks, delays or chance of failure.

Commercialization

Successful commercial adoption of our tests by clinicians and biopharmaceutical companies is critical to our business. For clinicians, endorsement by KOLs, utilization by academic centers and inclusion in national treatment guidelines are important, especially for adoption in the local community setting where 80% of cancer treatment occurs. We believe that our relationships with key stakeholders across the oncology space have helped facilitate the use of our tests by over 12,000 oncologists, who have collectively ordered our Guardant360 LDT test over 300,000 times, and over 150 biopharmaceutical companies.

U.S. clinical commercial efforts

We sell our tests to clinical customers in the United States through our targeted sales organization. Our clinician-focused sales organization in the United States is engaged in sales efforts and promotional activities primarily targeting oncologists and cancer centers. Our sales representatives typically have extensive backgrounds in laboratory testing, therapeutics and oncology. We have supplemented the team with clinical oncology specialists with extensive medical affairs experience for molecular information support in the field.

Our clinical commercial efforts are focused on driving adoption with academic research institutions and with community oncology practices, including through leading physician networks. As we continue to grow our sales organization, we are also expanding our reach to include large community practices, community oncology networks, integrated delivery/ payer-owned systems and government medical facilities that are looking for a reliable partner for comprehensive molecular information testing.

Biopharmaceutical commercial efforts

Our business development team is focused on enterprise selling to biopharmaceutical companies in the United States and internationally, and we believe we can support our biopharmaceutical customers across many applications, including:

•discovery of new targets and mechanisms of acquired resistance;

•retrospective sample analysis to rapidly identify biomarkers associated with response and lack of response;

•prospective screening and referral services to accelerate clinical study enrollment; and

•companion diagnostic development to support the approval and commercialization of therapeutics.

We also expect to be able to capture other commercial opportunities from our genomic data, which can be used in combination with clinical outcomes or claims data for multiple applications, including novel target identification.

International commercial efforts and expansion

A component of our long-term growth strategy is to expand our commercial footprint internationally, and we expect to increase our sales and marketing expense to execute on this strategy. We currently offer our tests in countries outside the United States primarily through direct contacts with insurers and hospitals, distributor relationships, and laboratory partnerships. Specifically, we have already demonstrated the ability to deploy our technology to partner laboratories such as cancer centers, for the development of test assays based on our technology platform. We believe that this capability will be important in accelerating adoption of our platform and the performance of our testing in certain countries. We are conducting studies in various jurisdictions and have started efforts to secure reimbursement in several countries. As these studies progress and we near commercial opportunities there, we are seeking to establish in-country laboratories and direct sales organizations.

In May 2018, we formed and capitalized a joint venture, Guardant Health AMEA, Inc., with SoftBank, which we refer to as the Joint Venture or Guardant AMEA, relating to the sale, marketing and distribution of our tests generally outside the Americas and Europe and to accelerate commercialization of our products in Asia, the Middle East and Africa. In February 2021, an affiliate of Guardant AMEA, submitted an application to Japan's Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, or the MHLW, for regulatory approval of Guardant360 CDx. In December 2021, MHLW granted regulatory approval of Guardant360 CDx as a companion diagnostic for identifying patients with metastatic NSCLC who may benefit from treatment with LUMAKRAS™ (sotorasib). In March 2022, MHLW granted regulatory approval of Guardant360® CDx in patients with advanced solid tumors. MHLW also approved Guardant360 CDx as a companion diagnostic to identify patients with microsatellite instability-high (MSI-High) solid tumors who may benefit from Keytruda® (pembrolizumab) and patients with MSI-High advanced colorectal cancer who may benefit from Opdivo® (nivolumab). In February 2022, we received CAP accreditation for our laboratory in Japan where we expect to commence processing samples following receipt of additional certification for processing In Vitro Diagnostic, or IVD, samples and reimbursement approval.

As part of our international expansion and to obtain full control over operations throughout the Asia, Middle East and Africa region, in November 2021, we exercised our call right contained in the joint venture agreement with SoftBank to purchase all of the shares held by SoftBank and its affiliates in consideration for the payment of the aggregate purchase price to be determined based on an independent third-party valuation. Upon our exercise of the call right in November 2021, SoftBank no longer had the option to exercise its put right. In June 2022, we purchased all of the shares held by SoftBank and its affiliates in consideration for a cash payment of the aggregate purchase price of $177.8 million, as determined by an independent valuation firm, which resulted in $99.8 million of fair value adjustments to the noncontrolling interest liability for the year ended December 31, 2022.

In June 2022, we signed a strategic partnership agreement with Adicon Holdings Limited, a leading independent clinical laboratory company based in China, to offer our industry-leading comprehensive genomic profiling tests to biopharmaceutical companies conducting clinical studies in China. We expect the partnership to help biopharmaceutical companies bring the next generation of cancer therapies to patients in the region.

In preparation for wider commercialization in the European Union, or the EU, we obtained a CE mark for our Guardant360 CDx, Guardant360 LDT, and Guardant Reveal tests. In December 2020, we signed our first public private partnership agreement with Vall D'Hebron Institute of Oncology, or VHIO, one of Europe’s leading cancer research institutions, and in May 2022, the first blood-based cancer testing services in Europe based on our industry-leading digital sequencing platform became available at the VHIO testing facility in Spain. In October 2021, we signed a partnership agreement with The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, a premier cancer center within the United Kingdom for patient care, research and teaching of all types of cancer. We expect these partnerships will lead to the establishment of our testing services at the partner laboratories, using our digital sequencing technology, as well as generation of clinical and economic evidence to support commissioning in other areas of Europe.

Payer coverage and reimbursement

Commercial payers

Payment from commercial payers can vary depending on whether we have entered into a contract with the payers as a “participating provider” or do not have a contract and are considered a “non-participating provider.” Payers often reimburse non-participating providers, if at all, at a lower amount than participating providers. When we contract with a payer to serve as a participating provider, reimbursements by the payer are generally made pursuant to a negotiated fee schedule and are limited to only covered indications or where prior approval has been obtained. Becoming a participating provider can result in higher reimbursement amounts for covered uses of our tests and, potentially, no reimbursement for non-covered uses identified under the payer’s policies or the contract. As a result, the potential for more favorable reimbursement associated with becoming a participating provider may be offset by a potential loss of reimbursement for non-covered uses of our tests.

We have provided testing services to patients covered by commercial payers with many cancer types and indications, some of the time as a non-participating provider through 2022. We received reimbursement for tests across the spectrum of these patients, though for amounts that on average were significantly lower than for participating providers. Because we are not contracted with these payers, they determine the amount that they are willing to reimburse us for any of our tests and they can prospectively and retrospectively adjust the amount of reimbursement, subject to statue of limitations.

Our tests are currently covered by various commercial payers and our reimbursement is directly impacted by their policies. We have experienced situations where commercial payers proactively reduced the amounts they were willing to reimburse for our tests, and where commercial payers have determined that the amounts previously paid were too high and sought to recover those perceived excess payments by deducting such amounts from payments owed to us.

In addition to our existing contracted payers, various laboratory benefit managers and evidence review organizations working with commercial payers have endorsed coverage of our Guardant360 test.

We are actively engaged to expand coverage among existing contracted payers and to achieve coverage with the remaining key commercial payers, laboratory benefit managers and evidence review organizations. This includes addressing variable coverage requirements and evidence required, and the need for enhanced guideline support.

As we broaden our coverage amongst contracted payers to include additional tests of ours, we may begin to experience increases in average revenue per test performed; however, we cannot make any assurances that we will be successful in broadening our coverage on a timely basis or at all. Similarly, as we have experienced with our existing contracted payers, we cannot assure that the addition of new contracted payers will increase our average selling price or revenue.

Government payers

Medicare coverage is limited to items and services that are within the scope of a Medicare benefit category that are reasonable and necessary for the diagnosis or treatment of an illness or injury. National coverage determinations are made through an evidence-based process by the CMS, with opportunities for public participation. Medicare’s National Coverage Determination, or NCD, for Next Generation Sequencing, or NGS, provides coverage for molecular diagnostic tests such as our Guardant360 CDx test, if, among other criteria, such tests are offered within their FDA-approved companion diagnostic labeling.

In March 2020, we began to receive reimbursement from Medicare for claims submitted with respect to Guardant360 clinical tests performed for qualifying patients diagnosed with solid tumor cancers of non-central nervous system origin other than NSCLC. In May 2020, Noridian issued a coverage article and confirmed limited Medicare coverage for our Guardant360 test for qualifying patients diagnosed with solid tumor cancers of non-central nervous system origin who meet the criteria of Medicare’s National Coverage Determination for Next Generation Sequencing established in March 2018. Under Medicare, payment for laboratory tests like ours is generally made under the Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule, or CLFS, with payment amounts assigned to specific procedure billing codes. In April 2014, Congress passed the Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014, or PAMA, which included substantial changes to the way in which clinical laboratory services are paid under Medicare. On June 23, 2016, CMS published the final rule implementing the reporting and rate-setting requirements under PAMA. Under PAMA, laboratories that receive the majority of their Medicare revenue from payments made under the CLFS were required to report to CMS, beginning in 2017 and every three years thereafter (or annually for “advanced diagnostic laboratory tests” (ADLTs)), commercial payer payment rates and volumes for each test they perform. CMS uses this data to calculate a weighted median payment rate for each test, which is used to establish revised Medicare CLFS reimbursement rates for the test. We are subject to reporting requirements under PAMA and the Medicare rate for our tests will be calculated based on our private payer rates. On December 10, 2021, Congress passed the Protecting Medicare and American Farmers from Sequester Cuts Act, which delayed the next data reporting period by one year and prevented any reduction in payment amounts from commercial payer rate implementation in 2022. On November 2, 2022, CMS published its final rule for the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule for calendar year (CY) 2023, including changes for clinical laboratories that take effect on January 1, 2023. Changes include updated regulatory definitions to specify the data collection period for the data reporting period of January 1, 2023 through March 31, 2023; revisions to indicate that data reporting is required every 3 years beginning January 2023; and to confirm that for CY 2022, payment may not be reduced by more than 0% as compared to CY 2021, and for CYs 2023 through 2025, payment may not be reduced by more than 15% as compared to the amount established for the preceding year. On December 29, 2022, Congress passed the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, which prevented any reduction in payment amounts from commercial payor rate implementation for 2023; delayed by one year data reporting requirements for tests other than ADLTs; and extended the three-year period in which payment may not be reduced by more than 15%, to CYs 2024 through 2026.

Current Procedural Terminology, or CPT, coding plays a significant role in how our tests are reimbursed both from commercial and governmental payers. In addition, Z-Code Identifiers are used by certain payers, including under Medicare's MolDx, to supplement CPT codes for our molecular diagnostics tests. Changes to the codes used to report to payers may result in significant changes in reimbursement. If their policies were to change in the future to cover additional cancer indications, we anticipate that our total reimbursement would increase. In January 2021, a PLA code was issued for our Guardant360 CDx test with an effective date in April 2021. Additionally, based on this new PLA code, we applied to the CMS for our Guardant360 CDx test to become an advanced diagnostic laboratory test, or ADLT. In March 2021, CMS approved ADLT status to the Guardant360 CDx test, based on which Medicare paid us at the lowest available commercial rate per test, from April 1, 2021 to December 31, 2021. Effective January 1, 2022, Medicare has started to reimburse Guardant360 CDx services at the median rate of claims paid by commercial payers and this rate will apply until December 2023. In March 2022, Palmetto GBA, the Medicare administrative contractor for MolDX, has conveyed coverage for our Guardant360 TissueNext test under the existing local coverage determination. The policy covers our Guardant360 TissueNext test for Medicare fee-for-service patients with advanced solid tumor cancers. In July 2022, Palmetto GBA conveyed coverage for our Guardant Reveal test for fee-for-service Medicare patients in the United States with stage II or III colorectal cancer whose testing is initiated within three months following curative intent therapy, with an effective date of December 2021.

State Medicaid programs make individual coverage decisions for diagnostic tests and have taken steps to control the cost, utilization and delivery of healthcare services. We believe that additional state and federal health care reform measures may be adopted in the future, any of which could have a material adverse effect on the clinical laboratory industry and our ability to successfully commercialize our tests. Any of these or other changes could substantially impact our revenues and increase costs. We cannot predict how future healthcare policy changes, if any, will affect our business and financial success.

Other Considerations

Where we are not reimbursed in full or at all, we may elect to appeal the insurer’s underpayment or denial of payment or seek payment from the patient. However, insurer appeal and patient collection efforts take a substantial amount of time and resources and are often unsuccessful. We cannot guarantee future success of, or any payments from, appeals of reimbursement denials by payers. Historic success and payments are not indicative of future success of and payments from such appeals.

Due to the inherent variability and unpredictability of the reimbursement landscape, including related to the amount that payers reimburse us for any of our tests, we estimate the amount of revenue to be recognized at the time a test is provided and record revenue adjustments if and when the cash subsequently received differs from the revenue recorded. Due to this variability and unpredictability, previously recorded revenue adjustments are not indicative of future revenue adjustments from actual cash collections, which may fluctuate significantly. Additionally, if coding changes were to occur, payments for certain uses of our tests could be reduced, put on hold, or eliminated. This variability and unpredictability could increase the risk of future revenue reversal and result in our failing to meet any previously publicly stated guidance we may provide.

Operations

We currently perform our tests in our laboratories located in Redwood City, California, and San Diego, California. Our Redwood City laboratory is CAP-accredited, CLIA-certified, NYSDOH-permitted, and licensed in California, Florida, Maryland, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island, and also achieved ISO15189 accreditation. Our San Diego laboratory is CAP-accredited and CLIA-certified. In addition, our Palo Alto, California laboratory is currently operated as a center for our research and technology development. In February 2022, we received CAP accreditation for our laboratory in Japan where we expect to commence processing samples following receipt of additional certification for processing IVD samples and reimbursement approval.

The proprietary validated methods utilize robust semi-automated workflows designed for high throughput sample testing. This methodology allows for rapid scaling of testing volume without impacting performance metrics. Our testing process includes sample collection, laboratory processing, analysis and reporting. All major processing steps utilize quality control to ensure consistent and reproducible results.

Supply chain

We utilize industry leading vendors for our supply chain. Most reagents and materials are sourced from a limited number of vendors and would require qualification to transition to a different vendor. To mitigate risk, we employ a multi-month, multi-lot safety stock strategy to ensure an uninterrupted supply of reagent and materials to our laboratories. In the event that a latent defect is identified, the lot of material in use is expected to be timely quarantined and changed for a new lot that has been previously qualified and released for use. The experience with our vendors has provided us confidence in their ability to produce consistent and quality instrumentation, reagents and materials.

In September 2014, we entered into a supply agreement with Illumina, Inc., or Illumina, for Illumina to provide products and services that can be used for certain research and clinical activities, including certain sequencers, reagents, and other consumables for use with the Illumina sequencers, as well as service contracts for the maintenance and repair of the sequencers. The initial term of the supply agreement, as amended, continues until January 2033, and automatically renews for additional one-year terms thereafter unless either we or Illumina terminate the supply agreement for the other’s uncured material breach, bankruptcy or insolvency-related events, or in the event a regulatory authority notifies such party that continued performance under the supply agreement would violate applicable laws or regulations. We may also terminate the supply agreement for convenience upon 90 days’ prior written notice.

Competition

Our competitors within the liquid biopsy space for therapy selection include Foundation Medicine, Inc., which was acquired by Roche Holdings, Inc. in 2018; Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc., Illumina, Inc., Qiagen N.V., Invitae Corporation, Caris Life Science, Tempus Labs, Inc., and Agilent Technologies, Inc. In addition, NeoGenomics Laboratories, Inc., Natera, Inc., and Exact Sciences Corp., among others, are our competitors in minimal residual disease testing. Additionally, our competitors in the early screening testing space include GRAIL, Inc., Exact Sciences Corp., Freenome Holdings, Inc., Delfi Diagnostics and InterVenn Biosciences.

Competitors within the broader genomics profiling space based on tissue include laboratory companies such as Bio-Reference Laboratories, Inc., Laboratory Corporation of America and Quest Diagnostics, Inc., as well as companies such as Myriad Genetics, Inc., and most if not all of the competitors within the liquid biopsy space for therapy selection, that sell molecular diagnostic tests for cancer to physicians and have or may develop tests that compete with our tests. In addition, we are aware that certain of our customers are also developing their own tests and may decide to enter our market or otherwise stop using our tests.

In addition to developing kits, certain diagnostic companies also provide next-generation sequencing platforms that could be used for liquid biopsy testing. These include Illumina, Inc., Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc., Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc., Ultima Genomics, Inc., Oxford Nanopore Technologies Limited, and other companies developing next-generation sequencing platforms that are sold directly to biopharmaceutical companies, clinical laboratories and research centers. While many of the applications for these platforms are focused on research and development applications, each of these companies has launched and could continue to commercialize products focused on the clinical oncology market. These tests could include FDA-approved diagnostic kits, which can be sold to the clients who have purchased their platforms.

Furthermore, many companies are developing information technology-based tools to support the integration of next-generation sequencing testing into the clinical setting. These companies may also use their own tests or others to develop an integrated system which could limit our access to certain networks.

The promise of liquid biopsy is also leading to more companies attempting to enter the space and compete with us. Over the last year, that has included new and accelerated development programs by a number of potential competitors, and increasing levels of merger and acquisition activity by both existing and new competitors.

We believe key competitive factors affecting our success are the price and performance of our products, evidence of clinical differentiation, support by KOLs, commercial competitiveness, turnaround time and scope and quality of payer contracts. Our competitive landscape may change over the next few years as a result of new competitors entering through investment and acquisition activity.

Intellectual property

Protection of our intellectual property is fundamental to the long-term success of our business. We seek to ensure that investments made into the development of our technology are protected by relying on a combination of patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets (such as know-how), license agreements, confidentiality agreements and procedures, non-disclosure agreements, invention disclosure and assignment agreements and other contractual rights and obligations.

Our patent strategy is focused on seeking coverage for our core technology, our digital sequencing platform, and specific follow-on applications and implementations for detecting and monitoring cancer or other diseases by determining genetic variations in patient samples. In addition, we file for patent protection in connection with our on-going research and development activities, particularly those related to early-stage cancer detection, including those based on pattern recognition based on analyzing our extensive patient blood sample database, among others.

Our patent portfolio includes owned and licensed patents and patent applications, generally falling into three broad categories:

•issued patents and patent applications relating to our digital sequencing platform, including claims directed to methods for sequencing cell-free DNA, identifying CNVs, SNVs, indels and fusions in cell-free DNA and techniques for enriching nucleic acid samples;

•issued patents and patent applications relating to detecting and monitoring cancer and other diseases by determining genetic variations in biological samples; and

•issued patents and patent applications relating to early-stage cancer detection.

Issued U.S. patents and their international counterparts currently in our patent portfolio that relate to various aspects of our technology and products are expected to expire between 2026 and 2039.

We also bolster our proprietary technology by acquiring or in-licensing technologies developed by third parties. While we developed our digital sequencing platform internally, we believe the technologies we in-licensed from third parties, which mostly relate to improvements to next-generation sequencing technologies, are potentially valuable and of possible strategic importance to us or our competitors. Under some of our in-license agreements, we are obligated to pay low single-digit percentage running royalties on net sales of the product or service where the licensed technology is used in, subject to minimum annual royalties or fees for certain of the in-license agreements.

Our customers and partners recognize us as being a leader in the liquid biopsy field. Thus, just as patent and trade secret protection is essential to protecting our technology, we believe that it is equally as important for us to protect our brand and identity. We have filed for trademark protection in our name, logo and products globally, in the United States, Australia, South America, Europe and Asia.

We intend to pursue additional intellectual property protection to the extent we believe it would advance our business objectives. Despite our efforts to protect our intellectual property rights, however, we may not be successful and our intellectual property rights may be invalidated, circumvented or challenged and found unenforceable. In addition, laws of various foreign countries where our products are or expected to be sold may not protect our intellectual property rights to the same extent as laws in the United States.

We also rely on trade secrets, including know-how, to protect our unpatented technology and other proprietary information, and to maintain and strengthen our competitive position. We have determined that certain technologies, such as aspects of our sample preparation methods and some bioinformatic analysis techniques, are better kept as trade secrets. To mitigate the chance of trade secret misappropriation, it is our policy to enter into nondisclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to our trade secrets, such as our employees, collaborators, outside scientific collaborators, consultants, advisors and other third parties. We also enter into invention disclosure and assignment agreements with our employees and consultants that obligate them to assign to us any inventions they have developed while working for us.

Government regulations

Federal and state laboratory licensing requirements

Under CLIA, a laboratory is any facility that performs laboratory testing on specimens derived from humans for the purpose of providing information for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of disease, or the impairment of or assessment of health. CLIA requires that a laboratory hold a certificate applicable to the type of laboratory examinations it performs and that it complies with, among other things, standards covering operations, personnel, facilities administration, quality systems and proficiency testing, which are intended to ensure, among other things, that clinical laboratory testing services are accurate, reliable and timely.

To renew our CLIA certificate, we are subject to survey and inspection every two years to assess compliance with program standards. Because we are a CAP accredited laboratory, CMS does not perform this survey and inspection and relies on our CAP survey and inspection. We also may be subject to additional unannounced inspections. Laboratories performing high complexity testing are required to meet more stringent requirements than laboratories performing less complex tests. In addition, a laboratory that is certified as “high complexity” under CLIA may develop, manufacture, validate and use proprietary tests referred to as LDTs. CLIA requires analytical validation including accuracy, precision, specificity, sensitivity and establishment of a reference range for any LDT used in clinical testing. The regulatory and compliance standards applicable to any testing we perform may change over time and any such changes could have a material effect on our business.

CLIA provides that a state may adopt laboratory regulations that are more stringent than those under federal law, and a number of states have implemented their own more stringent laboratory regulatory requirements. For example, state laws may require that nonresident laboratories, or out-of-state laboratories, maintain an in-state laboratory license to perform tests on samples from patients who reside in that state. As a condition of state licensure, these state laws may require that laboratory personnel meet certain qualifications, specify certain quality control procedures or facility requirements or prescribe record maintenance requirements. Because our laboratory is located in the State of California, we are required to and do maintain a California state laboratory license. We maintain a current license with NYSDOH for our laboratory. In addition, our laboratory is licensed in a few states where nonresident laboratories are required to obtain state laboratory licenses under certain circumstances, including Florida, Maryland, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island. Other states may currently have or adopt similar licensure requirements in the future, which may require us to modify, delay or stop its operations in those states.

Failure to comply with CLIA certification and state clinical laboratory licensure requirements may result in a range of enforcement actions, including certificate or license suspension, limitation, or revocation, directed plan of action, onsite monitoring, civil monetary penalties, criminal sanctions, and revocation of the laboratory’s approval to receive Medicare and Medicaid payment for its services, as well as significant adverse publicity.

CLIA and state laws and regulations, operating together, sometimes limit the ability of laboratories to offer consumer-initiated testing (also known as “direct access testing”). CLIA certified laboratories are permitted to perform testing only upon the order of an “authorized person,” defined as an individual authorized under state law to order tests or receive test results, or both. Many states do not permit persons other than licensed healthcare providers to order tests. We currently do not offer direct access testing and our CLIA tests may only be ordered by authorized healthcare providers.

Regulatory framework for medical devices in the United States

Pursuant to its authority under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, or the FDCA, the FDA has jurisdiction over medical devices, which are defined to include, among other things, IVDs. The FDA regulates, among other things, the research, design, development, pre-clinical and clinical testing, manufacturing, safety, effectiveness, packaging, labeling, storage, recordkeeping, pre-market clearance or approval, adverse event reporting, marketing, advertising and promotion activities, sales, distribution and import and export of medical devices to ensure that medical devices distributed domestically are safe and effective for their intended uses and otherwise meet the requirements of the FDCA. Unless an exemption applies, each new or significantly modified medical device we seek to commercially distribute in the United States will require either a premarket notification to the FDA requesting permission for commercial distribution under Section 510(k) of the FDCA, also referred to as a 510(k) clearance, or approval from the FDA of a PMA application. Both the 510(k) clearance and PMA processes can be resource intensive, expensive, and lengthy, and require payment of significant user fees.

Device classification

Under the FDCA, medical devices are classified into one of three classes-Class I, Class II or Class III-depending on the degree of risk associated with each medical device and the extent of control needed to provide reasonable assurances with respect to safety and effectiveness.

Class I includes devices with the lowest risk to the patient and are those for which safety and effectiveness can be reasonably assured by adherence to a set of FDA regulations, referred to as the General Controls for Medical Devices, which require compliance with the applicable portions of the FDA’s quality system regulation, or QSR, facility registration and product listing, reporting of adverse events and malfunctions, and appropriate, truthful and non-misleading labeling and promotional materials. Some Class I devices also require premarket clearance by the FDA through the 510(k) premarket notification process described below. Most Class I products are exempt from the premarket notification requirements.

Class II devices are those that are subject to the General Controls, as well as special controls as deemed necessary by the FDA to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the device. These special controls can include performance standards, patient registries, FDA guidance documents and post-market surveillance. Most Class II devices are subject to premarket review and clearance by the FDA. Premarket review and clearance by the FDA for Class II devices is accomplished through the 510(k) premarket notification process.

Class III devices include devices deemed by the FDA to pose the greatest risk such as life-supporting or life-sustaining devices, or implantable devices, in addition to those deemed novel and not substantially equivalent following the 510(k) process. The safety and effectiveness of Class III devices cannot be reasonably assured solely by the General Controls and special controls described above. Therefore, these devices are subject to the PMA process, which is generally more costly and time-consuming than the 510(k) process. As part of the PMA process, the applicant must submit data and information demonstrating reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the device for its intended use to the FDA’s satisfaction. Accordingly, a PMA typically includes, but is not limited to, extensive technical information regarding device design and development, pre-clinical and clinical study data, manufacturing information, labeling and financial disclosure information for the clinical investigators in device studies. A PMA must also provide valid scientific evidence that demonstrates to the FDA’s satisfaction a reasonable assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the device for its intended use.

The 510(k) clearance process

Under the 510(k) clearance process, the manufacturer must submit to the FDA a premarket notification, demonstrating that the device is “substantially equivalent” to a legally marketed predicate device. A predicate device is a legally marketed device that is not subject to a PMA, i.e., a device that was legally marketed prior to May 28, 1976 (pre-amendments device) and for which a PMA is not required, a device that has been reclassified from Class III to Class II or I, or a device that was previously found substantially equivalent through the 510(k) process. To be “substantially equivalent,” the proposed device must have the same intended use as the predicate device, and either have the same technological characteristics as the predicate device or have different technological characteristics and not raise different questions of safety or effectiveness than the predicate device. Clinical data is sometimes required to support substantial equivalence.

After a 510(k) premarket notification is submitted, the FDA determines whether to accept it for substantive review. If it lacks necessary information for substantive review, the FDA will refuse to accept the 510(k) notification. If it is accepted for filing, the FDA begins a substantive review. By statute, the FDA is required to complete its review of a 510(k) notification within 90 days of receiving the 510(k) notification. As a practical matter, clearance often takes longer, and clearance is never assured. Although many 510(k) premarket notifications are cleared without clinical data, the FDA may require further information, including clinical data, to make a determination regarding substantial equivalence, which may significantly prolong the review process. If the FDA agrees that the device is substantially equivalent, it will grant clearance to commercially market the device.

If the FDA determines that the device is not “substantially equivalent” to a predicate device, or if the device is automatically classified into Class III, the device sponsor must then fulfill the much more rigorous pre-marketing requirements of the PMA approval process, or seek reclassification of the device through the de novo process. The de novo classification process is an alternate pathway to classify medical devices that are automatically classified into Class III but which are low to moderate risk. A manufacturer can submit a petition for direct de novo review if the manufacturer is unable to identify an appropriate predicate device and the new device or new use of the device presents a moderate or low risk. De novo classification may also be available after receipt of a “not substantially equivalent” letter following submission of a 510(k) to FDA.

After a device receives 510(k) clearance, any modification that could significantly affect its safety or effectiveness, or that would constitute a new or major change in its intended use, will require a new 510(k) clearance or, depending on the modification, could require a PMA or de novo request. The FDA requires each manufacturer to determine whether the proposed change requires a new submission in the first instance, but the FDA can review any such decision and disagree with a manufacturer’s determination. Many minor modifications are accomplished by a letter-to-file in which the manufacture documents the change in an internal letter-to-file. The letter-to-file is in lieu of submitting a new 510(k) to obtain clearance for such change. The FDA can always review these letters to file in an inspection. If the FDA disagrees with a manufacturer’s determination regarding whether a new premarket submission is required for the modification of an existing 510(k)-cleared device, the FDA can require the manufacturer to cease marketing and/or recall the modified device until 510(k) clearance or approval of a PMA is obtained or a de novo request is granted. In addition, in these circumstances, the FDA can impose significant regulatory fines or penalties for failure to submit the requisite application(s).

In addition, over the last several years, the FDA has proposed reforms to its 510(k) clearance process, and such proposals could include increased requirements for clinical data and a longer review period, or could make it more difficult for manufacturers to utilize the 510(k) clearance process for their products. For example, in September 2019, the FDA issued revised final guidance describing an optional “safety and performance based” premarket review pathway for manufacturers of “certain, well-understood device types” to demonstrate substantial equivalence under the 510(k) clearance pathway by showing that such device meets objective safety and performance criteria established by the FDA, thereby obviating the need for manufacturers to compare the safety and performance of their medical devices to specific predicate devices in the clearance process. The FDA has developed and maintain a list device types appropriate for the “safety and performance based” pathway and continues to develop product-specific guidance documents that identify the performance criteria for each such device type, as well as recommended testing methods, where feasible.

The PMA process

We currently market our Guardant360 CDx test pursuant to an approved PMA. The PMA process is more demanding than the 510(k) premarket notification process. In a PMA, the manufacturer must demonstrate that the device is safe and effective, and the PMA must be supported by extensive data, including data from preclinical studies and human clinical studies. The PMA must also contain a full description of the device and its components, a full description of the methods, facilities, and controls used for manufacturing, and proposed labeling. Following receipt of a PMA, the FDA conducts an administrative review to determine whether the application is sufficiently complete to permit a substantive review. If it is not, the agency will refuse to file the PMA. If it is, the FDA will accept the application for filing and begin the review. The FDA has 180 days to review a filed PMA, although the review of an application more often occurs over a significantly longer period of time. During this review period, the FDA may request additional information or clarification of information already provided and may issue a major deficiency letter to the applicant, requesting the applicant’s response to deficiencies communicated by the FDA.

Before approving or denying a PMA, an FDA advisory committee may review the PMA at a public meeting and provide the FDA with the committee’s recommendation on whether the FDA should approve the submission, approve it with specific conditions, or not approve it. The FDA is not bound by the recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations carefully when making decisions.

Prior to approval of a PMA, the FDA may conduct inspections of the clinical study data and clinical study sites, as well as inspections of the manufacturing facility and processes. Overall, the FDA review of a PMA generally takes between one and three years but may take significantly longer.

If the FDA evaluation of a PMA is favorable, the FDA will issue either an approval order, or an approvable letter, the latter of which usually contains a number of conditions that must be met in order to secure final approval of the PMA. When and if those conditions have been fulfilled to the satisfaction of the FDA, the agency will issue a PMA approval letter authorizing commercial marketing of the device, subject to the conditions of approval and the limitations established in the approval letter. If the FDA’s evaluation of a PMA or manufacturing facilities is not favorable, the FDA will deny approval of the PMA or issue a not approvable letter. The FDA may also determine that additional tests or clinical studies are necessary, in which case the PMA approval may be delayed for several months or years while the studies are conducted and data is submitted in an amendment to the PMA, or the PMA is withdrawn and resubmitted when the data are available. The PMA process can be expensive, uncertain and lengthy and a number of devices for which the FDA approval has been sought by other companies have never been approved for marketing.

In approving a PMA, as a condition of approval, the FDA may require some form of post-approval study or post-market surveillance, whereby the applicant conducts a follow-up study or follows certain patient groups for a number of years and makes periodic reports to the FDA on the clinical status of those patients when necessary to protect the public health or to provide additional or longer term safety and effectiveness data for the device. The FDA may also approve a PMA with other post-approval conditions intended to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the device, such as restrictions on labeling, promotion, sale, distribution and use. New PMAs or PMA supplements may also be required for modifications to approved diagnostic tests, including modifications to manufacturing processes, device labeling and device design, based on the findings of post-approval studies. Failure to comply with the conditions of approval can result in material adverse enforcement action, including withdrawal of the approval.

Certain changes to an approved device, such as changes in manufacturing facilities, methods, or quality control procedures, or changes in the design performance specifications, which could affect the safety or effectiveness of the device, require submission of a PMA supplement. PMA supplements often require submission of the same type of information as a PMA, except that the supplement is limited to information needed to support any changes from the device covered by the original PMA and may not require as extensive clinical data or the convening of an advisory panel. Certain other changes to an approved device require the submission of a new PMA, such as when the design change causes a different intended use, mode of operation, and technical basis of operation, or when the design change is so significant that a new generation of the device will be developed, and the data that were submitted with the original PMA are not applicable for the change in demonstrating a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness.

The IDE process

Clinical studies are almost always required to support a PMA or a de novo request, and are sometimes required to support 510(k) submissions. All clinical investigations of devices to determine safety and effectiveness must be conducted in accordance with the FDA’s investigational device exemption, or IDE, regulations which govern investigational device labeling, prohibit promotion of the investigational device, and specify an array of recordkeeping, reporting and monitoring responsibilities of study sponsors and study investigators. If the device presents a “significant risk” to human health, as defined by the FDA, the FDA requires the device sponsor to submit an IDE application to the FDA, which must become effective prior to commencing human clinical studies. If the device under evaluation does not present a significant risk to human health, then the device sponsor is not required to submit an IDE application to the FDA before initiating human clinical studies, but must still comply with abbreviated IDE requirements when conducting such studies. A significant risk device is one that presents a potential for serious risk to the health, safety or welfare of a patient and either is implanted, used in supporting or sustaining human life, substantially important in diagnosing, curing, mitigating or treating disease or otherwise preventing impairment of human health, or otherwise presents a potential for serious risk to a subject. An IDE application must be supported by appropriate data, such as animal and laboratory test results, showing that it is safe to test the device in humans and that the testing protocol is scientifically sound. The IDE will automatically become effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA unless the FDA notifies the company that the investigation may not begin. If the FDA determines that there are deficiencies or other concerns with an IDE for which it requires modification, the FDA may permit a clinical study to proceed under a conditional approval.

Regardless of the degree of risk presented by the medical device, clinical studies must be approved by, and conducted under the oversight of, an Institutional Review Board, or IRB, for each clinical site. The IRB is responsible for the initial and continuing review of the IDE, and may pose additional requirements for the conduct of the study. If an IDE application is approved by the FDA and one or more IRBs, human clinical studies may begin at a specific number of investigational sites with a specific number of patients, as approved by the FDA. If the device presents a non-significant risk to the patient, a sponsor may begin the clinical study after obtaining approval for the study by one or more IRBs without separate approval from the FDA, but must still follow abbreviated IDE requirements, such as monitoring the investigation, ensuring that the investigators obtain informed consent, and labeling and record-keeping requirements. Acceptance of an IDE application for review does not guarantee that the FDA will allow the IDE to become effective and, if it does become effective, the FDA may or may not determine that the data derived from the studies support the safety and effectiveness of the device or warrant the continuation of clinical studies. An IDE supplement must be submitted to, and approved by, the FDA before a sponsor or investigator may make a change to the investigational plan that may affect its scientific soundness, study plan or the rights, safety or welfare of human subjects.

During a study, the sponsor is required to comply with the applicable FDA requirements, including, for example, study monitoring, selecting clinical investigators and providing them with the investigational plan, ensuring IRB review, adverse event reporting, record keeping and prohibitions on the promotion of investigational devices or on making safety or effectiveness claims for them. The clinical investigators in the clinical study are also subject to FDA’s regulations and must obtain patient informed consent, rigorously follow the investigational plan and study protocol, control the disposition of the investigational device, and comply with all reporting and recordkeeping requirements. Additionally, after a study begins, the sponsor, the FDA or the IRB could suspend or terminate a clinical study at any time for various reasons, including a belief that the risks to study subjects outweigh the anticipated benefits.

Expedited development and review programs

Following passage of the 21st Century Cures Act, the FDA implemented the Breakthrough Devices Program, which is a voluntary program offered to manufacturers of certain medical devices and device-led combination products that may provide for more effective treatment or diagnosis of life-threatening or irreversibly debilitating diseases or conditions. The goal of the program is to provide patients and health care providers with more timely access to qualifying devices by expediting their development, assessment and review, while preserving the statutory standards for PMA approval, 510(k) clearance and de novo classification. The program is available to medical devices that meet certain eligibility criteria, including that the device provides more effective treatment or diagnosis of life-threatening or irreversibly debilitating diseases or conditions, and that the device meets one of the following criteria: (i) the device represents a breakthrough technology, (ii) no approved or cleared alternatives exist, (iii) the device offers significant advantages over existing approved or cleared alternatives, or (iv) the availability of the device is in the best interest of patients. Breakthrough Device designation provides certain benefits to device developers, including more interactive and timely communications with FDA staff, use of postmarket data collection, when scientifically appropriate, to facilitate expedited and efficient development and review of the device, opportunities for efficient and flexible clinical study design, and prioritized review of premarket submissions.

FDA regulation of laboratory developed tests

Although the FDA has statutory authority to assure that medical devices, including IVDs, are safe and effective for their intended uses, the FDA has generally exercised its enforcement discretion and not enforced applicable regulations with respect to in vitro diagnostics that are designed, manufactured, and used within a single laboratory for use only in that laboratory. We believe certain of our diagnostic testing products qualify as LDTs subject to the FDA’s enforcement discretion.

Legislative and administrative proposals to clarify or amend FDA’s oversight of LDTs have been introduced in recent years and we expect that new legislative and administrative proposals regarding the regulation of LDTs will continue to be introduced from time to time. It is possible that legislation could be enacted into law or regulations or guidance could be issued by the FDA which may result in new or increased regulatory requirements for us to continue to offer our LDTs or to develop and introduce new tests as LDTs. For example, in recent years, FDA has stated its intention to modify its enforcement discretion policy with respect to LDTs. Specifically, on July 31, 2014, the FDA notified Congress of its intent to modify, in a risk-based manner, its policy of enforcement discretion with respect to LDTs. On October 3, 2014, the FDA issued two draft guidance documents titled “Framework for Regulatory Oversight of Laboratory Developed Tests (LDTs),” or the Framework Guidance, and “FDA Notification and Medical Device Reporting for Laboratory Developed Tests (LDTs),” or the Reporting Guidance. The Framework Guidance stated that FDA intends to modify its policy of enforcement discretion with respect to LDTs in a risk-based manner consistent with the classification of medical devices generally in Classes I through III. The Reporting Guidance would have further enabled FDA to collect information regarding the LDTs currently being offered for clinical use through a notification process, as well as to enforce its regulations for reporting safety issues and collecting information on any known or suspected adverse events related to the use of an LDT.

On November 18, 2016, the FDA announced that it would not finalize either guidance document to allow for further public discussion on an appropriate oversight approach to LDTs and to give Congressional authorizing committees the opportunity to develop a legislative solution, and the FDA issued a discussion paper on possible approaches to LDT regulation in January 2017. The FDA could ultimately modify its current approach to LDTs in a way that would subject LDTs to additional regulatory requirements. Moreover, legislative measures could likewise result in a change to the approach to FDA’s regulation over LDTs, including a requirement for premarket review of LDTs, among other things.

Research use only or investigational use only devices

Some of our products are currently available for research use only, or RUO, or for investigational use only, or IUO, depending on the proposed application. An RUO device is an IVD that is in the laboratory research phase of development. RUO devices must bear prominent labeling stating: “For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.” An IUO device is an IVD that in the product testing phase of development. An IUO device must bear prominent labeling stating: “For Investigational Use Only. The performance characteristics of this product have not been established.” Neither RUO or IUO devices may be used in clinical practice, and such devices cannot be advertised or promoted for clinical or diagnostic purposes. Devices that are intended for RUO or IUO and are properly labeled as RUO or IUO are exempt from compliance with many FDA requirements discussed above, including the approval or clearance and QSR requirements. A device labeled RUO or IUO but intended to be used diagnostically may be viewed by the FDA as adulterated and misbranded under the FDCA and is subject to FDA enforcement activities. The FDA may consider the totality of the circumstances surrounding distribution and use of an RUO or IUO device, including how the device is marketed, when determining its intended use.

FDA Regulation of Companion Diagnostics

If safe and effective use of drug or biologic depends on an in vitro diagnostic, then the FDA may require approval or clearance of that diagnostic, known as a companion diagnostic, at the same time that the FDA approves the therapeutic product. In August 2014, the FDA issued final guidance clarifying the requirements that will apply to approval of therapeutic products and in vitro companion diagnostics. According to the guidance, if the FDA determines that a companion diagnostic device is essential to the safe and effective use of a novel therapeutic product for that indication, the FDA may will not approve the drug or new indication if the companion diagnostic device is not also approved or cleared for that indication. Approval or clearance of the companion diagnostic device will ensure that the device has been adequately evaluated and has adequate performance characteristics in the intended population.

Our Guardant 360 CDx test has been approved by the FDA for use as a companion diagnostic to identify NSCLC and breast cancer patients who may respond to certain therapies marketed by our biopharmaceutical customers.

Pervasive and continuing FDA regulation

After a device enters commercial distribution, numerous regulatory requirements continue to apply. These include:

•establishment registration and device listing with the FDA;

•the FDA’s QSR, which requires manufacturers, including third-party manufacturers, to follow stringent design, testing, production, control, supplier/contractor selection, complaint handling, documentation and other quality assurance procedures during all aspects of the manufacturing process;

•labeling regulations, unique device identification requirements and FDA prohibitions against the promotion of products for uncleared, unapproved or off-label uses;

•advertising and promotion requirements;

•restrictions on sale, distribution or use of a device;

•PMA annual reporting requirements;

•PMA approval of product modifications, or the potential for new 510(k) clearances for certain modifications to 510(k)-cleared devices;

•medical device reporting regulations, which require that manufacturers report to the FDA if their device may have caused or contributed to a death or serious injury or malfunctioned in a way that would likely cause or contribute to a death or serious injury if the malfunction were to recur;

•medical device correction and removal reporting regulations, which require that manufacturers report to the FDA field corrections and product recalls or removals if undertaken to reduce a risk to health posed by the device or to remedy a violation of the FDCA that may present a risk to health;

•recall requirements, including a mandatory recall if there is a reasonable probability that the device would cause serious adverse health consequences or death;

•an order of repair, replacement or refund;

•device tracking requirements; and

•post-market surveillance regulations, which apply when necessary to protect the public health or to provide additional safety and effectiveness data for the device.

The FDA has broad post-market and regulatory enforcement powers. Medical device manufacturers are subject to unannounced inspections by the FDA and other state, local and foreign regulatory authorities to assess compliance with the QSR and other applicable regulations, and these inspections may include the manufacturing facilities of any suppliers. Failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements can result in enforcement action by the FDA, which may include sanctions such as: warning letters, fines, injunctions, consent decrees and civil penalties; unanticipated expenditures, repair, replacement, refunds, recall or seizure of our products; operating restrictions, partial suspension or total shutdown of production; the FDA’s refusal of our requests for 510(k) clearance or premarket approval of new products, new intended uses or modifications to existing products; the FDA’s refusal to issue certificates to foreign governments needed to export products for sale in other countries; and withdrawing 510(k) clearance or premarket approvals that have already been granted and criminal prosecution.

Foreign regulation of medical devices

Medical devices (including in vitro diagnostic medical devices) are subject to extensive regulation, such as premarket review, marketing authorization or certification, by similar agencies or notified bodies in other countries. Regulatory requirements and approval or certification processes are not harmonized and vary from one country to another. International regulators and notified bodies are independent and not bound by the findings of the FDA.

Regulation of Medical Devices in the EU

The EU has adopted specific directives and regulations regulating the design, manufacture, clinical investigations, conformity assessment, labeling and adverse event reporting for medical devices (including in vitro diagnostic medical devices).

In the EU, there is currently no premarket government review of medical devices (including in vitro diagnostic medical devices). However, the EU requires that all in vitro diagnostic medical devices placed on the market in the EU must meet the essential requirements of the EU In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices Directive (Directive 98/79/EC), or IVDD, including the requirement that an in vitro diagnostic medical device must be designed and manufactured in such a way that it will not compromise the clinical condition or safety of patients, or the safety and health of users and others. In addition, the device must achieve the performances intended by the manufacturer and be designed, manufactured, and packaged in a suitable manner. The European Commission has adopted various standards applicable to medical devices. There are also harmonized standards relating to design and manufacture. While not mandatory, compliance with these standards is viewed as the easiest way to satisfy the essential requirements as a practical matter as it creates a rebuttable presumption that the device satisfies that essential requirement.

Compliance with the essential requirements of the IVDD is a prerequisite for European conformity marking, or CE mark, without which in vitro diagnostic medical devices cannot be marketed or sold in the EU. To demonstrate compliance with the essential requirements laid down in Annex I to the IVDD, medical device manufacturers must undergo a conformity assessment procedure, which varies according to the type of medical device and its (risk) classification. As a general rule, demonstration of conformity of in vitro diagnostic medical devices and their manufacturers with the essential requirements must be based, among other things, on the evaluation of clinical data supporting the safety and performance of the products during normal conditions of use. Specifically, a manufacturer must demonstrate that the device achieves its intended performance during normal conditions of use, that the known and foreseeable risks, and any adverse events, are minimized and acceptable when weighed against the benefits of its intended performance, and that any claims made about the performance and safety of the device are supported by suitable evidence. Except for (general) in vitro diagnostic medical devices (i.e., all in vitro diagnostic medical devices other than those covered by Annex II to the IVDD and in vitro diagnostic medical devices for self-testing), where the manufacturer can self-declare the conformity of its products with the essential requirements, a conformity assessment procedure requires the intervention of a notified body. Notified bodies are independent organizations designated by EU member states to assess the conformity of devices before being placed on the market. A notified body would typically audit and examine a product’s technical dossiers and the manufacturers’ quality system (notified body must presume that quality systems which implement the relevant harmonized standards – which is ISO 13485:2016 for Quality Management Systems – conform to these requirements). If satisfied that the relevant product conforms to the relevant essential requirements, the notified body issues a certificate of conformity, which the manufacturer uses as a basis for its own declaration of conformity. The manufacturer may then apply the CE mark to the device, which allows the device to be placed on the market throughout the EU. We have obtained CE mark for our Guardant360 CDx test and the non-CDx blood collection kit.

Throughout the term of the certificate of conformity, the manufacturer will be subject to periodic surveillance audits to verify continued compliance with the applicable requirements. In particular, there will be a new audit by the notified body before it will renew the relevant certificate(s).

All manufacturers placing in vitro diagnostic medical devices on the market in the EU must comply with the EU medical device vigilance system. Under this system, incidents must be reported to the relevant authorities of the EU member states, and manufacturers are required to take Field Safety Corrective Actions, or FSCAs, to reduce a risk of death or serious deterioration in the state of health associated with the use of an in vitro diagnostic medical device that is already placed on the market. An incident is defined as any malfunction or deterioration in the characteristics and/or performance of a device, as well as any inadequacy in the labeling or the instructions for use which, directly or indirectly, might lead to or might have led to the death of a patient or user or of other persons or to a serious deterioration in their state of health. An FSCA may include the recall, modification, exchange, destruction or retrofitting of the device. FSCAs must be communicated by the manufacturer or its legal representative to its customers and/or to the end users of the device through field safety notices.

The advertising and promotion of in vitro diagnostic medical devices is subject to some general principles set forth by EU directives. According to the IVDD, only devices that are CE marked may be marketed and advertised in the EU in accordance with their intended purpose. Directive 2006/114/EC concerning misleading and comparative advertising and Directive 2005/29/EC on unfair commercial practices, while not specific to the advertising of medical devices, also apply to the advertising thereof and contain general rules, for example requiring that advertisements are evidenced, balanced and not misleading. Specific requirements are defined at national level. EU member states laws related to the advertising and promotion of medical devices (including in vitro diagnostic medical devices), which vary between jurisdictions, may limit or restrict the advertising and promotion of products to the general public and may impose limitations on promotional activities with healthcare professionals.

Many EU member states have adopted specific anti-gift statutes that further limit commercial practices for medical devices (including in vitro diagnostic medical devices), in particular vis-à-vis healthcare professionals and organizations. Additionally, there has been a recent trend of increased regulation of payments and transfers of value provided to healthcare professionals or entities and many EU member states have adopted national “Sunshine Acts” which impose reporting and transparency requirements (often on an annual basis), similar to the requirements in the United States, on medical device manufacturers. Certain countries also mandate implementation of commercial compliance programs.

In the EU, regulatory authorities have the power to carry out announced and, if necessary, unannounced inspections of companies, as well as suppliers and/or sub-contractors and, where necessary, the facilities of professional users. Failure to comply with regulatory requirements (as applicable) could require time and resources to respond to the regulatory authorities’ observations and to implement corrective and preventive actions, as appropriate. Regulatory authorities have broad compliance and enforcement powers and if such issues cannot be resolved to their satisfaction can take a variety of actions, including untitled or warning letters, fines, consent decrees, injunctions, or civil or criminal penalties.

The EU regulatory landscape concerning medical devices is evolving. On April 5, 2017 Regulation (EU) 2017/746 of the European Parliament and of the Council on in vitro diagnostic medical devices and repealing Directive 98/79/EC and Commission Decision 2010/227/EU, or IVDR, was adopted to establish a modernized and more robust EU legislative framework, with the aim of ensuring better protection of public health and patient safety. Unlike the IVDD, the IVDR is directly applicable in all EU member states without the need for member states to implement into national law. This aims at reducing the risk of discrepancies in interpretation across the different European markets. On October 14, 2021, the European Commission proposed a “progressive” roll-out of the IVDR to prevent disruption in the supply of in vitro diagnostic medical devices. Consequently, if the European Parliament and Council adopt the proposed regulation, the IVDR will fully apply on May 26, 2022 but there will be a tiered system extending the grace period for many devices (depending on their risk classification) before they have to be fully compliant with the regulation.

The IVDR will become applicable five years after publication on May 26, 2022. Once applicable, the IVDR will among other things:

•strengthen the rules on placing devices on the market and reinforce surveillance once they are available;

•establish explicit provisions on manufacturers’ responsibilities for the follow-up of the quality, performance and safety of devices placed on the market;

•establish explicit provisions on importers’ and distributors’ obligations and responsibilities;

•impose an obligation to identify a responsible person who is ultimately responsible for all aspects of compliance with the requirements of the new regulation;

•improve the traceability of medical devices throughout the supply chain to the end-user or patient through the introduction of a unique identification number, to increase the ability of manufacturers and regulatory authorities to trace specific devices through the supply chain and to facilitate the prompt and efficient recall of medical devices that have been found to present a safety risk;

•set up a central database (Eudamed) to provide patients, healthcare professionals and the public with comprehensive information on products available in the EU; and

•strengthen rules for the assessment of certain high-risk devices that may have to undergo an additional check by experts before they are placed on the market.

Regulation of Companion Diagnostics

In the EU, in vitro diagnostic medical devices are regulated by the IVDD which regulates the placing on the market, the CE marking, the essential requirements, the conformity assessment procedures, the registration obligations for manufactures and devices as well as the vigilance procedure. In vitro diagnostic medical devices must comply with the requirements provided for in the IVDD, and with further requirements implemented at national level (as the case may be).

The regulation of companion diagnostics will be subject to further requirements once the IVDR will become applicable on May 26, 2022. The IVDR introduces a new classification system for companion diagnostics which are now specifically defined as diagnostic tests that support the safe and effective use of a specific medicinal product, by identifying patients that are suitable or unsuitable for treatment. Companion diagnostics will have to undergo a conformity assessment by a notified body. Before it can issue a CE certificate, the notified body must seek a scientific opinion from the European Medicines Agency, or EMA, on the suitability of the companion diagnostic to the medicinal product concerned if the medicinal product falls exclusively within the scope of the centralized procedure for the authorization of medicines, or the medicinal product is already authorized through the centralized procedure, or a marketing authorization application for the medicinal product has been submitted through the centralized procedure. For other substances, the notified body can seek the opinion from a national competent authorities or the EMA.

The aforementioned EU rules are generally applicable in the European Economic Area, or EEA, which consists of the 27 EU member states plus Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland.

Brexit

Since January 1, 2021, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, or MHRA, has become the sovereign regulatory authority responsible for Great Britain (i.e. England, Wales and Scotland) medical device market according to the requirements provided in the Medical Devices Regulations 2002 (SI 2002 No 618, as amended) that sought to give effect to the three pre-existing EU directives governing active implantable medical devices, general medical devices and in vitro diagnostic medical devices whereas Northern Ireland continues to be governed by EU rules according to the Northern Ireland Protocol. Following the end of the Brexit transitional period on January 1, 2021, new regulations require medical devices to be registered with the MHRA (but manufacturers were given a grace period of four to 12 months to comply with the new registration process) before being placed on Great Britain market. The MHRA only registers devices where the manufacturer or their United Kingdom, or UK, Responsible Person has a registered place of business in the UK. Manufacturers based outside the UK need to appoint a UK Responsible Person that has a registered place of business in the UK to register devices with the MHRA in line with the grace periods. By July 1, 2023, in Great Britain, all medical devices will require a UKCA, or UK Conformity Assessed, mark but CE marks issued by EU notified bodies will remain valid until this time. Manufacturers may choose to use the UKCA mark on a voluntary basis until June 30, 2023. However, UKCA marking will not be recognized in the EU. The rules for placing medical devices on the market in Northern Ireland, which is part of the UK, differ from those in the rest of the UK. Compliance with this legislation is a prerequisite to be able to affix the UKCA mark to our products, without which they cannot be sold or marketed in Great Britain.

An MHRA public consultation was opened until end of November 2021 on the post-Brexit regulatory framework for medical devices and diagnostics. MHRA seeks to amend the UK Medical Devices Regulations 2002 (which are based on EU legislation, primarily the EU Medical Devices Directive 93/42/EEC and the IVDD), in particular to create a new access pathways to support innovation, create an innovative framework for regulating software and artificial intelligence, or AI, as medical devices, reform IVD regulation, and foster sustainability through the reuse and remanufacture of medical devices. The regime is expected to come into force in July 2023, coinciding with the end of the acceptance period for EU CE marks in Great Britain, subject to appropriate transitional arrangements. The consultation indicated that the MHRA will publish guidance in relation to the changes to the regulatory framework and may rely more heavily on guidance to add flexibility to the regime.

In addition, the Trade Deal between the UK and the EU generally provides for cooperation and exchange of information between the parties in the areas of product safety and compliance, including market surveillance, enforcement activities and measures, standardization-related activities, exchanges of officials, and coordinated product recalls. As such, processes for compliance and reporting should reflect requirements from regulatory authorities.

Under the terms of the Northern Ireland Protocol, Northern Ireland follows EU rules on medical devices and devices marketed in Northern Ireland require assessment according to the EU regulatory regime. Such assessment may be conducted by an EU notified body, in which case a CE mark is required before placing the device on the market in the EU or Northern Ireland. Alternatively, if a UK notified body conducts such assessment, a ‘UKNI’ mark is applied and the device may only be placed on the market in Northern Ireland and not the EU.

Other foreign regulations

In February 2021, Guardant Health Japan, an affiliate of Guardant AMEA, submitted an application to the MHLW, for regulatory approval of Guardant360 CDx. In December 2021, the MHLW granted regulatory approval of Guardant360 CDx in patients with advanced solid cancers. The Guardant360 CDx test was also granted approval as a companion diagnostic to identify patients with microsatellite instability-high (MSI-High) solid tumors who may benefit from Keytruda® (pembrolizumab) and patients with MSI-High advanced colorectal cancer who may benefit from Opdivo® (nivolumab). The MHLW additionally granted regulatory approval of the Guardant360 CDx liquid biopsy test as a companion diagnostic for identifying patients with metastatic NSCL cancer who may benefit from treatment with LUMAKRASTM (sotorasib), a KRAS G12C inhibitor developed and manufactured by Amgen.

To be sold in Japan, most medical devices must undergo thorough safety examinations and demonstrate medical efficacy before they are granted approval, or “shonin.” The Japanese government, through the MHLW, regulates medical devices under the Pharmaceutical Affairs Law, or PAL. Oversight for medical devices is conducted with participation by the Pharmaceutical and Medical Devices Agency, or PMDA, a quasi-government organization performing many of the review functions for the MHLW. Penalties for a company’s noncompliance with PAL can be severe, including revocation or suspension of a company’s business license and criminal sanctions. The MHLW and PMDA also assess the quality management systems of the manufacturer and product conformity to the requirements of the PAL. We are subject to compliance inspections by these agencies.

We will seek approvals in other countries as may be required in the future.

Federal and state fraud and abuse laws

We are subject to federal fraud and abuse laws such as the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, or AKS, the federal Eliminating Kickbacks in Recovery Act, or EKRA, the federal prohibition against physician self-referral, or Stark Law, and the federal false claims law, or the False Claims Act, or FCA. We are also subject to similar state and foreign fraud and abuse laws.

The AKS prohibits knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting, or receiving remuneration, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, in return for or to induce such person to refer an individual, or to purchase, lease, order, arrange for, or recommend purchasing, leasing or ordering, any good, facility, item or service that is reimbursable, in whole or in part, under a federal healthcare program. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from an AKS violation constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the False Claims Act.

The EKRA prohibits knowingly and willfully soliciting or receiving any remuneration (including any kickback, bribe or rebate) directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, in return for referring a patient or patronage to a laboratory; or paying or offering any remuneration (including any kickback, bribe or rebate) directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, to induce a referral of an individual to a laboratory or in exchange for an individual using the services of that laboratory. The EKRA applies to all payers including commercial payers and government payers, and EKRA violations result in significant fines and/or up to 10 years in jail, separate and apart from existing AKS regulations.

The Stark Law and similar state laws, including California’s Physician Ownership and Referral Act, generally prohibit, among other things, clinical laboratories and other entities from billing a patient or any governmental or commercial payer for any diagnostic services when the physician ordering the service, or any member of such physician’s immediate family, has a direct or indirect investment interest in or compensation arrangement with us, unless the arrangement meets an exception to the prohibition.

Other federal fraud and abuse laws to which we are subject include but are not limited to the federal civil and criminal false claims laws including the FCA, which imposes liability on any person or entity that, among other things, knowingly presents, or causes to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for payment to the federal government, and the federal Civil Monetary Penalties Law, which prohibits, among other things, the offering or transfer of remuneration to a Medicare or state healthcare program beneficiary if the person knows or should know it is likely to influence the beneficiary’s selection of a particular provider, practitioner, or supplier of services reimbursable by Medicare or a state healthcare program, unless an exception applies. Under the FCA, private citizens can bring claims on behalf of the government through qui tam actions. We must also operate within the bounds of the fraud and abuse laws of the states in which we do business which may apply to items or services reimbursed by non-governmental third-party payers, including private insurers.

In addition, the Physician Payments Sunshine Act imposes, among other things, reporting requirements on manufacturers of certain devices, drugs and biologics for certain payments and transfers of value by them and in some cases their distributors to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), certain other health care providers such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners, and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians (as defined by the statute) and their immediate family members. Manufacturers must submit reports by the 90th day of each calendar year. Because we manufacture our own LDTs solely for use by or within our own laboratory, we believe that we are currently exempt from these reporting requirements.

Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, imprisonment, exclusion from government-funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, disgorgement, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, additional reporting or oversight obligations if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or other agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with the law and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations. If any physicians or other healthcare providers or entities with whom we do business is found to be not in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government-funded healthcare programs.

In January 2022, we received a civil investigative demand, or CID, from the United States Attorney for the Northern District of California in connection with an investigation under the False Claims Act. The CID requests information and documents regarding billing government-funded programs for our panel of genetic tests known as Guardant360. We are fully cooperating with the investigation. At this time, we are unable to predict the outcome of this investigation. See “Commitments and Contingencies – Legal Proceedings” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for more information.

Data Privacy and Security

Numerous state, federal and foreign laws, regulations and standards govern the collection, use, access to, confidentiality and security of health-related and other personal information, and could apply now or in the future to our operations or the operations of our partners. In the United States, numerous federal and state laws and regulations, including data breach notification laws, health information privacy and security laws and consumer protection laws and regulations govern the collection, use, disclosure, and protection of health-related and other personal information. In addition, certain foreign laws govern the privacy and security of personal data, including health-related data. Privacy and security laws, regulations, and other obligations are constantly evolving, may conflict with each other to complicate compliance efforts, and can result in investigations, proceedings, or actions that lead to significant civil and/or criminal penalties and restrictions on data processing.

Cybersecurity

In the normal course of business, we may collect and store personal information and other sensitive information, including proprietary and confidential business information, trade secrets, intellectual property, information regarding study participants in connection with clinical studies, sensitive third-party information and employee information. To protect this information, our existing cybersecurity policies require monitoring and detection programs, network security precautions, encryption of critical data, and management of third party risk. We maintain various protections designed to safeguard against cyberattacks, including firewalls and virus detection software. We have established and test our disaster recovery plan and we protect against business interruption by backing up our major systems. In addition, we periodically scan our environment for any vulnerabilities, perform penetration testing and engage third parties to assess effectiveness of our data security practices. In addition, we maintain insurance that includes cybersecurity coverage.

Our cybersecurity program is led by a team of cybersecurity professionals. The program incorporates industry-standard frameworks, policies and practices designed to protect the privacy and security of our sensitive information. Our cybersecurity team reports to the full Board of Directors annually on information security and cybersecurity matters, or as needed. Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, which is comprised of several members from our Board of Directors, has oversight responsibility for our data security practices and we believe the committee has the requisite skills and visibility into the design and operation of our data security practices to fulfill this responsibility effectively. Five members from our Board of Directors have cybersecurity experience, including AmirAli Talasaz, Vijaya Gadde, Meghan Joyce, Samir Kaul and Myrtle Potter.

Despite the implementation of our cybersecurity program, our security measures cannot guarantee that a significant cyberattack will not occur. A successful attack on our information technology systems could have significant consequences to the business. While we devote resources to our security measures to protect our systems and information, these measures cannot provide absolute security. See “Risk Factors – General Risk Factors” for additional information about the risks to our business associated with a breach or compromise to our information technology systems.

U.S. healthcare reform

In the United States, there have been a number of legislative and regulatory changes at the federal and state levels which seek to reduce healthcare costs and improve the quality of healthcare. For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act, or the ACA, became law. The ACA substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both commercial and government payers and contains a number of provisions expected to impact our business and operations, some of which in ways we cannot currently predict, including those governing enrollment in federal and state healthcare programs, reimbursement changes and fraud and abuse.

Since its enactment, there have been efforts to repeal all or part of the ACA. On June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the most recent judicial challenge to the ACA brought by several states without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA. Thus, the ACA will remain in effect in its current form. Further, prior to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, President Biden issued an executive order to initiate a special enrollment period from February 15, 2021 through August 15, 2021 for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the ACA marketplace. The executive order also instructed certain governmental agencies to review and reconsider their existing policies and rules that limit access to healthcare, including among others, reexamining Medicaid demonstration projects and waiver programs that include work requirements, and policies that create unnecessary barriers to obtaining access to health insurance coverage through Medicaid or the ACA.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. On August 2, 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011 was signed into law, which, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to providers, effective on April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect through 2032, with the exception of a temporary suspension from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2022, unless additional Congressional action is taken.

We anticipate there will continue to be proposals by legislators at both the federal and state levels, regulators and commercial payers to reduce costs while expanding individual healthcare benefits. Changes in healthcare coverage landscape could impose additional limitations on the prices we will be able to charge for our tests, the coverage of or the amounts of reimbursement available for our tests from payers, including commercial and government payers.

Employees and Human Capital

Our Employees and Commitment to Diversity, Equity and Inclusion

As of December 31, 2022, we had 1,793 full-time employees, of which approximately 1,685 are in the U.S., with the remainder in Asia, Europe and Canada. We have also engaged and may continue to engage independent contractors to assist us with our operations. None of our employees are represented by a labor union or covered by a collective bargaining agreement, except as required by local laws such as in some European countries, and we have never experienced any employment-related work stoppages. We also track voluntary and involuntary turnover rates, conduct frequent employee engagement surveys, and consider relations with our employees to be good.

As part of our mission to conquer cancer, we continue to advance our environmental, social and governance efforts, including enhancing the diversity and inclusiveness of our workplace. We believe that diversity of backgrounds and ideas inspires creativity and helps us create the innovative technologies that patients need. We appreciate one another’s differences and strengths and we are proud to be an equal opportunity employer. We do not discriminate on the basis of race, religion, color, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, non-disqualifying physical or mental disability, national origin, veteran status or any other basis covered by applicable law. All employment is decided on the basis of qualifications, merit, and business need. Further, we have policies in place that prohibit harassment of all kinds. We maintain an inclusive culture where all employees feel empowered to be their authentic selves. We respect and appreciate each employee’s unique perspective and experiences, and value their contribution to our mission. It is important that we celebrate, encourage and support similarities and differences to drive innovation for the benefit of our employees, patients and community.

We are proud to employ a diverse workforce that, as of December 31, 2022, was 57% racially/ethnically diverse and 55% female. For leadership positions across the company, which is defined as director level and above, 34% self-identified as racially/ethnically diverse and 40% self-identified as women. As of December 31, 2022, women held 50% of the independent director seats on our Board.

Culture, Compensation and Benefits

We strive to recruit, hire and retain a talented and diverse team of people who align with our values. Our employees are supported with training and development opportunities to pursue their career paths and ensure compliance with our policies. Our compensation and benefits team strive to develop and implement policies and programs that support our business goals, maintain competitiveness, promote shared fiscal responsibility among our employees, strategically align talent within our organization and reward performance, while also managing the costs of such policies and programs. In order to ensure that we are meeting our human capital objectives, we regularly utilize employee engagement surveys to understand the effectiveness of our employee development and compensation programs and where we can improve across the company. We also regularly evaluate our compensation programs with an independent compensation consultant and utilize industry benchmarking in an effort to ensure they are competitive compared to similar biotechnology and biopharmaceutical companies with which we compete for talent, as well as fair and equitable across our workforce with respect to gender, race and other personal characteristics.

We are committed to rewarding, supporting, and developing the employees who make it possible to deliver on our strategy. To that end, we offer a comprehensive total rewards package that includes market-competitive fixed and/or variable pay, broad-based equity grants and bonuses, access to medical, dental, vision and life insurance benefits, disability coverage, fertility subsidies, retirement savings plans, paid time off and family leave, caregiving support, fitness, cellphone and internet reimbursements, and mental health and other wellness benefits.

Available information

Our website is located at https://guardanthealth.com. Our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, including their exhibits, proxy and information statements, and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Sections 13(a), 14, and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, are available through the “Investors” portion of our website free of charge as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the SEC. Information on our website is not part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K or any of our other securities filings unless specifically incorporated herein by reference. In addition, our filings with the SEC may be accessed through the SEC’s Interactive Data Electronic Applications system at http://www.sec.gov. All statements made in any of our securities filings, including all forward-looking statements or information, are made as of the date of the document in which the statement is included, and we do not assume or undertake any obligation to update any of those statements or documents unless we are required to do so by law.

Item 1A. Risk Factors

Risk Factors

Our operations and financial results are subject to various risks and uncertainties including those described below. You should consider carefully the risks and uncertainties described below, in addition to other information contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including our consolidated financial statements and related notes. The risks and uncertainties described below 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 adversely affect our business. If any of the following risks or others not specified below materialize, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. In that case, the trading price of our common stock could decline.

Risks related to our business and strategy

We have incurred significant losses since inception, we may continue to incur losses in the future and we may not be able to generate sufficient revenue to achieve and maintain profitability.

We have incurred significant losses since our inception. For the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, we incurred net losses of $654.6 million, $384.8 million and $246.3 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2022, we had an accumulated deficit of $1.7 billion. To date, we have financed our operations principally from the sale of stock or convertible securities, and revenue from precision oncology testing and our development services. We have devoted substantially all of our resources to the development and commercialization of our current products and to research and development activities related to our future products, including clinical and regulatory initiatives to obtain marketing approval and sales and marketing activities. We will need to generate substantial revenue to achieve and then sustain profitability, and even if we achieve profitability, we cannot be sure that we will remain profitable for any period of time. Our failure to achieve or maintain profitability could negatively impact the value of our common stock.

We may not be able to generate sufficient revenue to achieve and maintain profitability and our current or future products may not achieve or maintain sufficient commercial market acceptance.

We are currently not profitable. Even if we succeed in increasing adoption of our existing products and services by physicians, obtaining additional coverage decisions from commercial and government payers, maintaining and creating relationships with our existing and new biopharmaceutical partners, and developing and commercializing additional products and services, we may not be able to generate sufficient revenue to achieve or maintain profitability.

We believe our commercial success is dependent upon our ability to continue to successfully market and sell our current and future products, to continue to expand our current relationships and develop new relationships with clinicians and biopharmaceutical customers and to develop and commercialize new products. Our ability to achieve and maintain sufficient commercial market acceptance of our existing and future products will depend on a number of factors, including:

•our ability to increase awareness of our tests and the benefits of liquid biopsy;

•the rate of adoption and/or endorsement of our tests by clinicians, KOLs, advocacy groups and biopharmaceutical companies;

•the timing and scope of any approval or certification by regulatory agencies, including the FDA, or notified bodies for our tests;

•our ability to obtain positive coverage decisions for our tests from additional commercial payers and to broaden the scope of indications included in such coverage decisions;

•our ability to obtain reimbursement and expanded coverage from government payers, including Medicare;

•the impact of our investments in product innovation and commercial growth;

•negative publicity regarding ours or our competitors’ products resulting from defects or errors; and

•our ability to further validate our technology through clinical research and accompanying publications.

We cannot assure that we will be successful in addressing each of these criteria or other criteria that might affect the market acceptance of our products. If we are unsuccessful in achieving and maintaining market acceptance of our products, our business and results of operations will suffer.

Our operating results may fluctuate significantly, which makes our future operating results difficult to predict and could cause our operating results to fall below expectations or any guidance we may provide.

Our quarterly and annual operating results may fluctuate significantly, which makes it difficult for us to predict our future operating results. These fluctuations may occur due to a variety of factors, many of which are outside of our control, including, but not limited to:

•the level of demand for any of our products, which may vary significantly;

•the timing and cost of, and level of investment in, research, development, regulatory approval or certification and commercialization activities relating to our products, which may change from time to time;

•the volume and customer mix of our precision oncology testing;

•the start and completion of projects in which our development services are utilized;

•the introduction of new products or product enhancements by us or others in our industry;

•coverage and reimbursement policies with respect to our products and products that compete with our products;

•expenditures that we may incur to acquire, develop or commercialize additional products and technologies;

•changes in governmental regulations or in the status of our regulatory approvals or certifications or applications;

•future accounting pronouncements or changes in our accounting policies;

•developments or disruptions in the business and operations of our clinical, commercial and other partners;

•the impact of natural disasters, political and economic instability, including wars, terrorism, and political unrest, epidemics or pandemics, including the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, boycotts, curtailment of trade and other business restrictions; and

•the effects of high inflation or other general market conditions and other factors, including factors unrelated to our operating performance or the operating performance of our competitors.

Additionally, it is difficult to predict the amount we are able to collect for our tests from commercial payers. We receive reimbursement for our tests from several commercial payers for whom we are not a participating provider. Because we are not contracted with these payers, they determine the amount they are willing to reimburse us for tests. We have provided testing services to patients with many cancer types and indications, some of the time as a non-participating provider through 2022. When we have received payment as a non-participating provider, the amounts, on average, were significantly lower than for participating providers. Even when these payers have paid a claim, they may elect at any time to review previously paid claims for overpayment against these claims. In the event of an overpayment determination, the payer may offset the amount they determine they overpaid against amounts they owe us on current claims. We have limited leverage to dispute these retroactive adjustments and we cannot predict when, or how often, a payer might engage in these reviews. A significant amount of these offsets by one or more payers in any given quarter could have a material effect on our results of operations and cause them to fall below expectations or guidance we may provide. Our efforts to become a participating provider of a number of commercial payers may not be successful. Even when we have obtained positive coverage decisions for our tests from commercial payers and entered into agreements with them, such agreements typically are standard form contracts and may allow payers to terminate coverage on short notice, impose significant obligations on us and create additional regulatory and compliance hurdles for us.

As part of our reimbursement operations, we appeal denials from payers, and if successful, we receive payments from these appeals. However, due to the inherent variability of the insurance landscape, we cannot guarantee future success of, or any payments from, appeals of reimbursement denials by payers. Historic success and payments are not indicative of future success of and payments from such appeals.

The cumulative effects of factors discussed above could result in large fluctuations and unpredictability in our quarterly and annual operating results. As a result, comparing our operating results on a period-to-period basis may not be meaningful. Investors should not rely on our past results as an indication of our future performance.

This variability and unpredictability could also result in our failing to meet the expectations of industry or financial analysts or investors for any period. If our revenue or operating results fall below the expectations of analysts or investors or below any guidance we may provide, or if the guidance we provide is below the expectations of analysts or investors, the price of our common stock could decline substantially. Such a stock price decline could occur even when we have met any previously publicly stated guidance we may provide.

New product development and commercialization involve a lengthy and complex process and we may be unable to develop or commercialize new products on a timely basis, or at all.

Products that are under development have taken time and considerable resources to develop, and we may not be able to complete the development and commercialization of the such products for clinical use on a timely basis, or at all. For example, there can be no assurance that we will be able to produce commercial products for early detection of cancer. Before we can commercialize any new products, we will need to expend significant funds in order to:

•conduct substantial research and development, including validation studies and clinical studies;

•further develop and scale our laboratory processes to accommodate different products; and

•further develop and scale our infrastructure to be able to analyze increasingly large amounts of data.

Our product development process involves a high degree of risk, and product development efforts may fail for many reasons, including:

•failure of the product to perform as expected, including defects and errors;

•lack of validation data; or

•failure to demonstrate the clinical utility of the product.

Our development plan involves using data and analytical insights generated from our current products as a force multiplier of returns on research and development investment in our future products. However, if we are unable to generate additional or compatible data and insights, then we may not be able to advance our products under development as quickly, or at all, or without significant additional investment.

As we develop products, we have made and will have to make significant investments in product development, marketing and selling resources, including investing heavily in clinical studies, which could adversely affect our future cash flows.

Our current revenue is primarily generated from sales of our tests and we are highly dependent on them for our success.

Our ability to execute our growth strategy and become profitable is highly dependent on the continued adoption and use of our tests, which accounted for almost all of our revenue in the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020. Continued adoption and use of our tests will depend on several factors, including the prices we charge for our tests, the scope of coverage and amount of reimbursement available from third-party payers for our tests, the availability of clinical data that supports the value of our tests and the inclusion of our tests in industry treatment guidelines. In addition, many biopharmaceutical companies have existing relationships with companies that develop molecular diagnostic tests, including our competitors, and may continue to use their tests instead of ours. Despite our business development efforts, it could be difficult, expensive and/or time-consuming for biopharmaceutical companies to switch diagnostic tests for their products, and our tests may not be widely accepted by biopharmaceutical companies, if at all, which could in turn hinder the growth of sales of our tests. If we are unable to achieve commercial success for our tests, our business, results of operations and financial condition would be materially and adversely affected. We cannot assure that our tests will continue to maintain or gain market acceptance, and any failure to do so would materially harm our business and results of operations.

If our products do not meet the expectations of patients and our customers, our operating results, reputation and business could suffer.

Our success depends on the market’s confidence that we can provide reliable, high-quality precision oncology products that will improve clinical outcomes, lower healthcare costs and enable better biopharmaceutical development. We believe that patients, clinicians and biopharmaceutical companies are likely to be particularly sensitive to product defects and errors in the use of our products, including if our products fail to detect genomic alterations with high accuracy from samples or if we fail to list or inaccurately include certain treatment options and available clinical studies in our test reports, and there can be no guarantee that our products will meet their expectations. Furthermore, if our competitors’ products do not perform to expectations, it may result in lower confidence in our tests as well. As a result, the failure of our products to perform as expected could significantly impair our operating results and our reputation. In addition, we may be subject to legal claims arising from any defects or errors in our products.

If we are unable to support demand for our current and future products, including ensuring that we have adequate capacity to meet increased demand, or we are unable to successfully manage our anticipated growth, our business could suffer.

As our volume of test sales grows, we will need to continue to increase our workflow capacity for sample intake, customer service, billing and general process improvements, expand our internal quality assurance program and extend our platform to support comprehensive genomic analysis at a larger scale within expected turnaround times. We will need additional certified laboratory scientists and other scientific and technical personnel to process higher volumes of our precision oncology products. Portions of our process are not automated and will require additional personnel to scale. We will also need to purchase additional equipment, some of which can take several months or more to procure, setup and validate, and increase our software and computing capacity to meet increased demand. There is no assurance that any of these increases in scale, expansion of personnel, equipment, software and computing capacities or process enhancements will be successfully implemented, if at all, or that we will have adequate space in our laboratory facility or be able to secure additional facility space to accommodate such required expansion.

As we commercialize additional products, we will need to incorporate new equipment, implement new technology systems and laboratory processes, and hire new personnel with different qualifications. Failure to manage this growth or transition could result in turnaround time delays, higher product costs, declining product quality, deteriorating customer service and slower responses to competitive challenges. A failure in any one of these areas could make it difficult for us to meet market expectations for our products and could damage our reputation and the prospects for our business.

If we cannot maintain our current relationships, or enter into new relationships, with biopharmaceutical companies, our revenue prospects could be reduced.

Biopharmaceutical customers collaborate with us for analysis of whole blood or plasma samples for multiple applications primarily to support clinical studies, including patient identification, companion diagnostics and retrospective testing. In the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, revenue from our top five biopharmaceutical customers, including their affiliated entities, accounted for 18%, 18% and 27% of our total revenue, respectively. The revenue attributable to our biopharmaceutical customers may also fluctuate in the future, which could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. In addition, the termination of these relationships could result in a temporary or permanent loss of revenue. Adverse speculation about our existing or potential relationships with biopharmaceutical companies may be a catalyst for adverse speculation about us, our products and our technology, which can adversely affect our reputation and business.

Our future success depends in part on our ability to maintain relationships and to enter into new relationships with biopharmaceutical customers, including offering our platform to such customers for companion diagnostic development, novel target discovery and validation as well as clinical study enrollment, and growing into other business opportunities. This can be difficult due to many factors, including the type of biomarker support required and our ability to deliver it and our biopharmaceutical customers’ satisfaction with our products or services, internal and external constraints placed on these organizations and other factors that may be beyond our control. Furthermore, our biopharmaceutical customers may decide to decrease or discontinue their use of our current products and tests, or our future products due to changes in their research and product development plans, failures in their clinical studies, financial constraints, or utilization of internal testing resources or tests performed by other parties, or other circumstances outside of our control. Continued usage of our tests by particular biopharmaceutical customers may also depend on whether the partner obtains positive data in its clinical studies, is able to successfully obtain regulatory approval and subsequently commercializes a therapy for which we have partnered with them to develop a companion diagnostic, or other administrative factors that are outside our control. Some of our biopharmaceutical customers have contracted with us to provide testing for large numbers of samples, which could strain our testing capacity and restrict our ability to perform tests for other customers. Furthermore, biopharmaceutical companies may decline to do business with us or decrease or discontinue their use of our tests due to their broad strategic collaboration with any of our competitors. In addition to reducing our revenue, the loss of one or more of these relationships may reduce our exposure to research and clinical studies that facilitate the collection and incorporation of new information into our platform and tests. We engage in conversations with biopharmaceutical companies regarding potential commercial opportunities on an ongoing basis. There is no assurance that any of these conversations will result in a commercial agreement, that the resulting relationship will be successful, or that clinical studies conducted as part of the engagement will produce successful outcomes. If we cannot maintain our current relationships, or enter into new relationships, with biopharmaceutical companies, our product development could be delayed and revenue and results of operations could be adversely affected.

Our payer concentration may materially adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

We receive a substantial portion of our revenue from a limited number of third-party commercial payers, most of which have not contracted with us to be a participating provider. If one or more of these payers were to significantly reduce, or cease to pay, the amount such payer reimburses us for tests we perform, or if such payer does not reach or maintain favorable coverage and reimbursement decisions for our tests, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. We have experienced situations where commercial payers proactively reduced the amounts they were willing to reimburse for our tests, and in other situations, commercial payers have determined that the amounts they previously paid were too high and have sought to recover those perceived excess payments by deducting such amounts from payments otherwise being made. If commercial payers were to decide not to include us as a participating provider, cease paying us altogether, drastically reduce the amount they were willing to pay us or attempt to recover any amounts they had already paid, it could cause significant fluctuations in our quarterly results and could harm our business and results of operations.

In September 2018, we began to receive reimbursement from Medicare for claims submitted with respect to Guardant360 clinical tests performed for NSCLC patients. In March 2020, we began to receive reimbursement from Medicare for claims submitted with respect to Guardant360 clinical tests performed for qualifying patients diagnosed with solid tumor cancers of non-central nervous system origin other than NSCLC. Revenue from clinical tests for patients covered by Medicare represented approximately 45%, 45% and 42% of our precision oncology revenue from clinical customers for the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively. Revenue attributable to Medicare accounted for more than 10% of our total revenue in each of the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020. In addition, pursuant to CMS regulations, we cannot bill Medicare directly for tests provided for Medicare beneficiaries in some situations. CMS adopted an exception to its laboratory date of service regulation, and if certain conditions are met, molecular testing laboratories such as us can rely on that exception to bill Medicare directly, instead of seeking payment from the hospital. If this exception is repealed or curtailed by CMS, or its laboratory date of service regulation is otherwise changed to adversely impact our ability to bill Medicare directly, our revenue could be materially reduced.

If we fail to obtain or maintain coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payers, we may be unable to increase our testing volume and revenue as expected. Retrospective reimbursement adjustments, such as deductions from further payments and clawbacks, can also negatively impact our revenue and cause our financial results to fluctuate. In addition, as part of our reimbursement operations, we appeal denials from payers, and if successful, we receive payments from these appeals. However, due to the inherent variability of the insurance landscape, we cannot guarantee future success of, or any payments from, appeals of reimbursement denials by payers. Historic success and payments are not indicative of future success of and payments from such appeals.

If we cannot compete successfully with our competitors, we may be unable to increase or sustain our revenue or to achieve and then sustain profitability.

Growing understanding of the importance of biomarkers linked with therapy selection, response and early screening is leading to more companies offering services in genomic profiling. The promise of biopsy testing is also leading to more companies attempting to enter the space and compete with us. Over the last year, that has included new and accelerated development programs by a number of potential competitors, and increasing levels of merger and acquisition activity by both existing and new competitors. Currently, our main competition is from diagnostic companies with products and services to profile genes in cancers based on either single-marker or comprehensive genomic profile testing, based on next-generation sequencing in either blood or tissue. This may change over the next few years as a result of new competitors entering through investment and acquisition activity.

Our competitors within the liquid biopsy space for therapy selection include Foundation Medicine, Inc., which was acquired by Roche Holdings, Inc. in 2018; Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., Thermo Fisher Scientific, Inc., Illumina, Inc., Qiagen N.V., Invitae Corporation, Caris Life Science, Tempus Labs, Inc., and Agilent Technologies, Inc. In addition, NeoGenomics Laboratories, Inc., Natera, Inc., Exact Sciences Corp., among others, are our competitors in minimal residual disease testing. Additionally, our competitors in the early screening testing space include GRAIL, Inc., Exact Sciences Corp., Freenome Holdings, Inc., Delfi Diagnostics and InterVenn Biosciences.

Competitors within the broader genomics profiling space based on tissue include laboratory companies such as Bio-Reference Laboratories, Inc., Laboratory Corporation of America and Quest Diagnostics, Inc., as well as companies such as Foundation Medicine, Inc., Myriad Genetics, Inc., and most if not all of the competitors within the liquid biopsy space for therapy selection, that sell molecular diagnostic tests for cancer to physicians and have or may develop tests that compete with our tests. In addition, we are aware that certain of our customers are also developing their own tests and may decide to enter our market or otherwise stop using our tests.

Some of our competitors and potential competitors may have longer operating histories; larger customer bases; greater brand recognition and market penetration; substantially greater financial, technological and research and development resources and selling and marketing capabilities; and more experience dealing with third-party payers. As a result, they may be able to respond more quickly to changes in customer requirements, devote greater resources to the development, promotion and sale of their tests than we do or sell their tests at prices designed to win significant levels of market share. We may not be able to compete effectively against these organizations. Increased competition and cost-saving initiatives on the part of governmental entities and other third-party payers are likely to result in pricing pressures, which could harm our sales, profitability or ability to gain market share. In addition, competitors may be acquired by, receive investments from or enter into other commercial relationships with larger, well-established and well-financed companies. Certain of our competitors may be able to secure key inputs from vendors on more favorable terms, devote greater resources to marketing and promotional campaigns, adopt more aggressive pricing policies and devote substantially more resources to product development than we can. In addition, companies or governments that control access to genetic testing through umbrella contracts or regional preferences could promote our competitors or prevent us from performing certain services. If we are unable to compete successfully against current and future competitors, we may be unable to increase market acceptance and sales of our tests, which could prevent us from increasing our revenue or achieving profitability and could cause our stock price to decline.

The sizes of the markets for our current and future products have not been established with precision, and may be smaller than we estimate.

Our estimates of the annual total addressable markets for our current products and products under development are based on a number of internal and third-party estimates, including, without limitation, the number of patients with late-stage, solid tumor cancer, the number of individuals who are at a higher risk for developing cancer, and the assumed prices at which we can sell tests for markets that have not been established. While we believe our assumptions and the data underlying our estimates are reasonable, these assumptions and estimates may not be correct and the conditions supporting our assumptions or estimates may change at any time, thereby reducing the predictive accuracy of these underlying factors. As a result, our estimates of the annual total addressable market for our current or future products may prove to be incorrect. If the actual number of patients who would benefit from our products, the price at which we can sell our products, or the annual total addressable market for our products is smaller than we have estimated, it may impair our sales growth and have an adverse impact on our business.

The precision oncology industry is subject to rapid change, which could make our current products and any future products we may develop, obsolete.

Our industry is characterized by rapid changes, including technological and scientific breakthroughs, frequent new product introductions and enhancements and evolving industry standards, all of which could make our current and future products obsolete. Our future success will depend on our ability to keep pace with the evolving needs of our customers on a timely and cost-effective basis and to pursue new market opportunities that develop as a result of scientific and technological advances. In recent years, there have been numerous advances in technologies relating to the diagnosis and treatment of cancer. There have also been advances in methods used to analyze very large amounts of molecular information. We must continuously enhance our platform and develop new products to keep pace with evolving standards of care. If we do not update our product offerings to reflect new scientific knowledge about cancer biology, information about new cancer therapies or relevant clinical studies, our products could become obsolete and sales of our current products and any new products we may develop could decline or fail to grow as expected.

We have experienced challenges attracting and retaining qualified personnel due to competitive labor markets and may continue to do so, and may be unable to manage our future growth effectively, all of which could make it difficult to execute our business strategy.

Since our inception, we have experienced rapid growth and anticipate further growth in our business operations. Our future growth could create strain on our organizational, administrative and operational infrastructure, including laboratory operations, quality control, customer service and sales organization management. We expect to continue to increase headcount and to hire more specialized personnel as we grow our business. We will need to continue to hire, train and manage additional qualified scientists, laboratory personnel, client and account services personnel, as well as sales and marketing staff, and improve and maintain our technology to properly manage our growth.

However, we have experienced challenges attracting and retaining qualified personnel due to competitive labor markets and may continue to do so. In this competitive environment, our business could be adversely impacted by increases in labor costs triggered by regulatory actions regarding wages, scheduling and benefits, the need to attract and retain high quality employees with the requisite skill sets, and the ongoing effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, if our new hires perform poorly, if we are unsuccessful in training, managing and integrating these new employees or if we are not successful in developing and retaining our existing employees, our business may be harmed.

In addition, we may not be able to maintain the quality or expected turnaround times of our products, or satisfy customer demand as it grows, and our business may be harmed. Our ability to manage our growth properly will also require us to continue to improve our operational, financial and management controls, as well as our reporting systems and procedures. The time and resources required to implement these new systems and procedures is uncertain and could be demanding, and failure to complete this in a timely and efficient manner could adversely affect our operations.

We may not be able to successfully market, sell or distribute our products, and if we are unable to expand our sales organization to adequately address our customers’ needs, our business may be adversely affected.

We may not be able to market, sell or distribute our products and tests, and other products we may develop effectively enough to support our planned growth. We currently sell to clinicians in the United States through our own sales organization and to biopharmaceutical companies through our business development team.

Each of our target markets is large, distinctive and diverse. As a result, we believe it is necessary for our sales representatives and business development managers to have established oncology-focused expertise. Competition for such employees within the precision oncology industry is intense. We may not be able to attract and retain personnel or be able to build an efficient and effective sales organization or business development team, which could negatively impact sales and market acceptance of our products and limit our revenue growth and potential profitability.

Our expected future growth will impose significant added responsibilities on members of management, including the need to identify, recruit, maintain and integrate additional employees. Our future financial performance and our ability to commercialize our products, to increase our sales and to compete effectively will depend, in part, on our ability to manage this potential future growth effectively, without compromising quality.

Outside the United States, we established Guardant AMEA for sales of our products throughout Asia, the Middle East and Africa. If the sales and marketing efforts for our products in those regions are not successful, our business would be materially and adversely affected. In other territories, such as Europe, we sell our tests primarily through distributor relationships or direct contracts with hospitals. Locating, qualifying, engaging and maintaining relationships with distribution partners and hospitals with local industry experience and knowledge will be necessary to effectively market and sell our products outside the United States. We may not be successful in finding, attracting and retaining distribution partners or local hospitals, or we may not be able to enter into such arrangements on favorable terms. Sales practices utilized by any such parties that are locally acceptable may not comply with sales practices standards required under U.S. laws that apply to us, which could create additional compliance risk. If our international sales and marketing efforts are not successful, we may not achieve market acceptance for our products outside the United States, which would materially and adversely impact our business.

We rely on a limited number of suppliers or, in some cases, sole suppliers, for some of our laboratory instruments and materials and may not be able to find replacements or promptly transition to alternative suppliers.

We rely on a limited number of suppliers or, in some cases, sole suppliers, including Illumina Inc., or Illumina, for certain sequencers, reagents, blood tubes and other equipment, instruments and materials that we use in our laboratory operations. An interruption in our laboratory operations could occur if we encounter delays or difficulties in securing these laboratory equipment, instruments or materials, and if we cannot then obtain an acceptable substitute. Any such interruption could significantly and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and reputation. We rely on Illumina as the sole supplier of the sequencers and as the sole provider of maintenance and repair services for these sequencers. Any disruption in operations of Illumina or other sole or limited suppliers or termination or suspension of our relationships with them could materially and adversely impact our supply chain and laboratory operations and thus our ability to conduct our business and generate revenue. These limited or sole suppliers could engage in diverse types of businesses, including selling products or providing services in competition with us, and there can be no assurance that we can continue to receive required equipment, instruments or materials from them.

We believe that there are only a limited number of other manufacturers that are capable of supplying and servicing the equipment and materials necessary for our laboratory operations, including sequencers and various associated reagents, and potentially replacing our current suppliers. The use of equipment or materials furnished by these replacement suppliers would require us to alter our laboratory operations. Transitioning to a new supplier would be time-consuming and expensive, may result in interruptions in our laboratory operations, could affect the performance specifications of our laboratory operations or could require that we revalidate our tests. There can be no assurance that we will be able to secure alternative equipment, reagents and other materials, bring such equipment, reagents and materials online, and revalidate our tests without experiencing interruptions in our workflow. In the case of an alternative supplier for Illumina, for example, there can be no assurance that replacement sequencers and various associated reagents will be available or will meet our quality control and performance requirements for our laboratory operations. If we should encounter delays or difficulties in securing, reconfiguring or integrating the equipment and reagents we require for our products or in revalidating our products, our business, financial condition, results of operations and reputation could be materially and adversely affected.

The COVID-19 global pandemic and the worldwide attempts to contain it have adversely impacted our supply chain and other aspects of our business, as well as our results of operations, and could continue to do so.

The global outbreak of coronavirus 2019, or COVID-19, and the various attempts throughout the world to contain it, have created significant volatility, uncertainty and disruption, which has and may continue to impact the global economy, disrupt our supply chain, and create significant volatility and disruption of financial markets.

We have experienced significant reduction in access to our customers, including restrictions on our ability to market and distribute our tests and to collect samples. Our partners, vendors, suppliers and customers have similarly had their operations altered or temporarily suspended. Due to impacts and measures resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, we have experienced and could continue to experience unpredictable reductions in the demand for our tests as healthcare customers divert medical resources and priorities toward the treatment of the virus. Our biopharmaceutical customers are facing challenges in recruiting patients and in conducting clinical studies to advance their product development pipelines, for which our tests could be utilized. To the extent the COVID-19 pandemic continues to cause severe disruption, vendors of equipment and reagents for our operations could also reduce productions or even go out of business, resulting in supply constraints for us. For example, movement of supplies has been significantly curtailed worldwide, which has caused supply shortages for certain of our major suppliers. Disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic have adversely affected the quantity and quality of certain sequencers, reagents, blood tubes and other similar materials that are critical to our commercial and research and development programs. We currently have a limited amount of stock of these components. Failure in the future to secure sufficient supply of critical components could materially and adversely affect our ability to manufacture or supply marketed products and product candidates or complete our ongoing research and development programs on the timelines previously established. Our ability to enroll suitable patients in clinical studies has also been negatively impacted and could continue to be adversely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

The full extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic and the various responses to it impacts our business, operations and financial results will depend on numerous evolving factors that we may not be able to accurately predict, including: the duration and scope of the pandemic; governmental, business and individuals’ actions that have been and continue to be taken in response to the pandemic; the adverse effects on our manufacturing operations and supply chain, which may impact our ability to produce and distribute our products, as well as the ability of third parties to fulfill their obligations to us and could increase our expenses; the possibility that third parties on which we rely for certain functions and services, suppliers, distributors, logistics providers, and external business partners, may be adversely impacted by restrictions resulting from COVID-19, which could cause us to experience delays or incur additional costs; the availability, cost to access and effectiveness of COVID-19 tests, vaccines and medicines; the effect on our customers and customer demand for and ability to pay for our tests; restrictions on the ability of our employees and the employees of third parties on which we rely for certain functions and services to work and travel; disruptions related to the distribution of our tests, including impacts on logistics of shipping and receiving blood collection kits; and any stoppages, disruptions or increased costs associated with development, production and marketing of our products. During the COVID-19 pandemic, we may not be able to maintain the same level of customer outreach and service, which could negatively impact our customers’ perception of us. We will continue to actively monitor the issues raised by the COVID-19 pandemic and may take further actions that alter our operations, as may be required by federal, state, local or foreign authorities, or that we determine are in the best interests of our employees, customers and stockholders. It is not clear what the potential effects any such alterations or modifications may have on our business, including the effects on our financial results.

The COVID-19 pandemic has also led to uncertainties related to our growth, forecast and trends. Our historic results such as revenues, operating margins, net income, cash flows, tests performed, and other financial and operating metrics, may not be indicative of our results for future periods. Any past increases in the number of clinical tests and/or biopharmaceutical tests performed by us may reflect the acceleration of growth that we have experienced but may not see in subsequent periods given the COVID-19 pandemic. Even if government and other restrictions are relaxed, our growth may slow or reverse, including due to a slow recovery. The COVID-19 pandemic and its future developments present uncertainties with respect to our performance, financial condition, volume of business, results of operations, and cash flows. Due to the uncertain scope and duration of the COVID-19 pandemic and uncertain timing of any recovery or normalization, we are currently unable to estimate the resulting impacts on our operations and financial results. In addition to the impacts to our business, the global economy is likely to be significantly weakened as a result of actions taken in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. To the extent that such a weakened global economy impacts customers’ ability or willingness to pay for our tests, our business and results of operation could be negatively impacted. As a result, we expect our revenue and results of operations to be adversely affected until testing, treatments and vaccines substantially eliminate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

If our existing laboratory facility becomes damaged or inoperable or we are required to vacate our existing facility, our ability to perform our tests and pursue our research and development efforts may be jeopardized.

We currently derive the majority of our revenue from tests performed at a single laboratory facility located in Redwood City, California. Our facility and equipment could be harmed or rendered inoperable by natural or man-made disasters, including war, fire, earthquake, power loss, communications failure or terrorism, which may render it difficult or impossible for our laboratory operations. The inability to perform our tests or to reduce the backlog that could develop if our facility is inoperable, for even a short period of time, may result in the loss of customers or harm to our reputation, and we may be unable to regain those customers or repair our reputation. Furthermore, our facility and the equipment we use to perform our research and development work could be unavailable or costly and time-consuming to repair or replace. It would be difficult, time-consuming and expensive to rebuild our facility, to locate and qualify a new facility or enable a third party to practice our proprietary technology, particularly in light of licensure and accreditation requirements. Even if we are able to find a third party with such qualifications to perform our tests, the parties may be unable to agree on commercially reasonable terms.

We carry insurance for damage to our property and disruption of our business, but this insurance may not cover all of the risks associated with damage or disruption to our facility and business, may not provide coverage in amounts sufficient to cover our potential losses and may not continue to be available to us on acceptable terms, if at all.

We are dependent on third parties for the collection of blood samples for our tests.

We rely on third-party phlebotomy providers, including physician offices, to collect blood samples for our tests. Our current third-party phlebotomy providers may refuse to continue to collect samples for us in the future, in particular if they have agreements or arrangements with one of our competitors to collect samples for their tests, or if the phlebotomy provider is owned or controlled by a laboratory that offers tests that compete with ours. There has been a trend towards consolidation of independent phlebotomy providers. Independent phlebotomy providers, once acquired by our competitors, may terminate their relationships with us. If our patients are unable to readily access a phlebotomy provider to collect a blood sample for our tests, we may be unable to compete effectively with other laboratories that have greater access to phlebotomy providers and our business, financial condition and results of operations may be harmed.

In addition, if third-party phlebotomy providers fail to adequately and properly obtain and collect viable blood samples from patients and to properly package and ship the samples to us, our patients and their physicians may experience problems and delays in receiving test results, which could lead to dissatisfaction with our tests, therefore harming our reputation and adversely affecting our business, financial condition and results of operations. Similarly, our contracts with physician owned phlebotomy providers to collect blood could be scrutinized under federal and state healthcare laws such as the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, or AKS, and the federal law prohibiting physician self-referral, or Stark Law, to the extent these services to us are deemed to provide a financial benefit to or relieve a financial burden for a potential referral source, or are subsequently found not to be for fair market value. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws and regulations, we may be subject to administrative, civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, individual imprisonment, exclusion from participation in federal healthcare programs or from coverage of commercial payers, refunding of payments received by us, and curtailment or cessation of our operations, any of which could harm our reputation and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We rely on commercial courier delivery services to transport samples to our laboratory facility in a timely and cost-efficient manner and if these delivery services are disrupted, our business will be harmed.

Our business depends on our ability to deliver test results quickly and reliably to our customers. Blood samples are typically received within days from the United States and outside the United States for analysis at our Redwood City, California facility. Disruptions in delivery services to transport samples to that facility, whether due to labor disruptions, bad weather, natural disaster, terrorist acts or threats or for other reasons could adversely affect specimen integrity and our ability to process samples in a timely manner, delay our provision of test results to our customers, and ultimately our reputation and our business. In addition, if we are unable to continue to obtain expedited delivery services to transport samples to us on commercially reasonable terms, our operating results may be adversely affected.

International expansion of our business exposes us to business, regulatory, political, operational, financial, and economic risks associated with doing business outside of the United States.

We currently have limited international operations, but our business strategy incorporates potentially significant international expansion, including through Guardant AMEA, which we formed to accelerate the commercialization of our products in Asia, the Middle East and Africa.

We plan to maintain distributor and partner relationships, to conduct physician and patient association outreach activities, to extend laboratory capabilities and to expand payer relationships, outside of the United States. Doing business internationally involves a number of risks, including:

•multiple, conflicting and changing laws and regulations such as privacy regulations, tax laws, export and import restrictions, economic sanctions and embargoes, employment laws, regulatory requirements and other governmental approvals, permits and licenses;

•failure by us, our distributors, or our local partners to obtain regulatory approvals or certifications for the use of our products in various countries;

•presence of additional third-party patents or other intellectual property rights that may be relevant to our business and may potentially block our expansion;

•complexities and difficulties in obtaining intellectual property protection and enforcing our intellectual property rights;

•difficulties in staffing and managing foreign operations;

•complexities associated with managing multiple payer reimbursement regimes, government payers, or patient self-pay systems;

•logistics and regulations associated with shipping blood samples, including infrastructure conditions and transportation delays;

•limits in our ability to penetrate international markets if we are not able to perform our tests locally;

•financial risks, such as longer payment cycles, difficulty collecting accounts receivable, the impact of local and regional financial crises on demand and payment for our products and exposure to foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations, currency controls and cash repatriation restrictions;

•natural disasters, political and economic instability, including wars, terrorism, and political unrest, boycotts, curtailment of trade and other business restrictions;

•public health or similar issues, such as epidemics or pandemics, that could cause business disruption for our offices in Japan and Singapore, and make it more difficult to sell our tests in the affected countries or regions, and

•regulatory and compliance risks that relate to maintaining accurate information and control over sales and distributors’ activities that may fall within the purview of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or FCPA, its books and records provisions, or its anti-bribery provisions.

Any of these factors could significantly harm our future international expansion and operations and, consequently, our revenue and results of operations.

We could be adversely affected by violations of the FCPA and other anti-bribery laws.

We are subject to the FCPA, which prohibits companies and their intermediaries from making payments in violation of law to non-U.S. government officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business or securing any other improper advantage, as a result of our international customers. Our reliance on independent distributors to sell our tests internationally demands a high degree of vigilance in maintaining our policy against participation in corrupt activity, because these distributors could be deemed to be our agents and we could be held responsible for their actions. Other U.S. companies in the medical device and biopharmaceutical field have faced criminal penalties under the FCPA for allowing their agents to deviate from appropriate practices in doing business with these individuals. We are also subject to similar anti-bribery laws in the jurisdictions in which we operate, including the United Kingdom’s Bribery Act of 2010, which also prohibits commercial bribery and makes it a crime for companies to fail to prevent bribery. These laws are complex and far-reaching in nature, and, as a result, we cannot assure that we would not be required in the future to alter one or more of our practices to be in compliance with these laws or any changes in these laws or the interpretation thereof. Any violations of these laws, or allegations of such violations, could disrupt our operations, involve significant management distraction, cause us to incur significant costs and expenses, including legal fees, and result in a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations. We could also suffer severe penalties, including criminal and civil penalties, disgorgement and other remedial measures.

Table of Contents

Risks related to our highly regulated industry

We conduct business in a heavily regulated industry, and changes in regulations or violations of regulations may, directly or indirectly, reduce our revenue, adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition, and harm our business.

The clinical laboratory testing industry is highly regulated, and there can be no assurance that the regulatory environment in which we operate will not change significantly and adversely to us in the future. Areas of the regulatory environment that may affect our ability to conduct business include, without limitation:

•federal, state and foreign laws applicable to test ordering, documentation of tests ordered, billing practices and claims payment and/or regulatory agencies enforcing those laws and regulations;

•federal, state and foreign health care fraud and abuse laws;

•federal, state and foreign laboratory anti-mark-up laws;

•coverage and reimbursement levels by Medicare, Medicaid, other governmental payers and private insurers;

•restrictions on coverage of and reimbursement for tests;

•federal, state and foreign laws governing laboratory testing, including CLIA, and state licensing laws;

•federal, state and foreign laws and enforcement policies governing the development, use and distribution of diagnostic medical devices, including laboratory developed tests, or LDTs;

•federal, state, local and foreign laws governing the handling and disposal of medical and hazardous waste;

•federal and state Occupational Safety and Health Administration rules and regulations;

•HIPAA, and similar state or foreign data privacy and security laws; and

•consumer protection laws.

In particular, the laws and regulations governing the marketing of clinical laboratory tests are complex, and there are often no sufficient regulatory or judicial interpretations of these laws and regulations. For example, some of our clinical laboratory tests are actively regulated by the FDA pursuant to the medical device provisions of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA. The FDA defines a medical device to include any instrument, apparatus, implement, machine, contrivance, implant, in vitro reagent or other similar or related article, including a component, part or accessory, intended for use in the diagnosis of disease or other conditions, or in the cure, mitigation, treatment or prevention of disease, in man or other animals. Our clinical laboratory tests are in vitro diagnostic products that are considered by the FDA to be medical devices. Among other things, pursuant to the FDCA and its implementing regulations, the FDA regulates the research, design, testing, manufacturing, safety, labeling, storage, recordkeeping, premarket clearance or approval, marketing and promotion and sales and distribution of medical devices in the United States to ensure that medical devices distributed domestically are safe and effective for their intended uses. In addition, the FDA regulates the import and export of medical devices. If we do not comply with these requirements or fail to adequately comply, our business may be harmed.

Certain of our tests are currently marketed as LDTs, and future changes in FDA enforcement discretion for LDTs could subject our operations to much more significant regulatory requirements.

We market some of our tests, Guardant360, Guardant360 Response, Guardant360 Tissue Next, and Guardant Reveal, as LDTs. LDTs are in vitro diagnostic tests that are intended for clinical use and are designed, manufactured, and used within a single laboratory. Although LDTs are classified as medical devices and the FDA has statutory authority to ensure that medical devices are safe and effective for their intended uses, the FDA has historically exercised enforcement discretion and has not enforced certain applicable FDA requirements, including premarket review, with respect to LDTs. While we believe that we are in material compliance with applicable laws and regulations, we cannot assure that the FDA will agree with us. If there are changes in FDA policy, or if the FDA disagrees that we are marketing our tests as LDTs within the scope of its policy of enforcement discretion, we may become subject to extensive regulatory requirements and may be required to stop selling our existing tests or launching any other tests we may develop and to conduct additional clinical studies or take other actions prior to continuing to market our tests. This could significantly increase the costs and expenses of conducting, or otherwise harm, our business.

Table of Contents

Legislative and administrative proposals proposing to amend the FDA’s oversight of LDTs have been introduced in recent years and we expect that new legislative and administrative proposals will continue to be introduced from time to time. It is possible that legislation could be enacted into law or regulations or guidance could be issued by the FDA which may result in new or increased regulatory requirements for us to continue to offer our LDTs or to develop and introduce new tests as LDTs.

In addition, the FDA and Congress have, for over the past decade, considered a number of proposals to end the FDA’s enforcement discretion policy for LDTs and subject LDTs to additional regulatory requirements.

Even if the FDA does not modify its policy of enforcement discretion, whether due to changes in FDA policy or legislative action, the FDA may disagree that we are marketing our LDTs within the scope of its policy of enforcement discretion and may impose significant regulatory requirements, including the requirement for premarket review and subsequent marketing authorization. We may also be required to conduct clinical studies to support our currently marketed products or planned product launches. If we are required to conduct such clinical studies delays in the commencement or completion of clinical testing could significantly increase our test development costs and delay commercialization of any currently-marketed tests that we may be required to cease selling or the commercialization of any future tests that we may develop, which could harm our financial prospects.

There is no guarantee that the FDA will grant 510(k) clearance or a premarket approval of our products or that similar foreign authorities or notified bodies will grant premarket approval or certify our products and failure to obtain necessary clearances or approvals or certifications for our products would adversely affect our ability to grow our business.

Before we begin to label and market our products for use as clinical diagnostics in the United States, including as companion diagnostics, we may be required to obtain either 510(k) clearance or a premarket approval, or supplemental premarket approval, or respectively, PMA or PMA supplement, from the FDA, unless an exemption applies or FDA exercises its enforcement discretion and refrains from enforcing its medical device requirements. For example, the FDA has a policy of refraining from enforcing such requirements with respect to LDTs, which the FDA considers to be a type of in vitro diagnostic test that is designed, manufactured and used within a single laboratory.

The process of obtaining a PMA is a rigorous, costly, lengthy and uncertain process. In the PMA process, the FDA must determine that a proposed device is safe and effective for its intended use based, in part, on extensive data, including, but not limited to, technical, pre-clinical, clinical study, manufacturing and labeling data. In the 510(k) clearance process, the FDA must determine that a proposed device is “substantially equivalent” to a device legally on the market, known as a “predicate” device, in order to clear the proposed device for marketing. To be “substantially equivalent,” the proposed device must have the same intended use as the predicate device, and either have the same technological characteristics as the predicate device or have different technological characteristics and not raise different questions of safety or effectiveness than the predicate device. Clinical data is sometimes required to support a substantial equivalence determination.

In order to sell our products in member states of the EU, our products must comply with the essential requirements of the EU In Vitro Diagnostic Medical Devices Directive (Directive 98/79/EC), or IVDD. Compliance with these requirements is a prerequisite to be able to affix the European Conformity, or CE, mark to our products, without which they cannot be sold or marketed in the EU. All medical devices placed on the market in the EU must meet the essential requirements laid down in Annex I to the IVDD including the requirement that an in vitro diagnostic medical device must be designed and manufactured in such a way that it will not compromise the clinical condition or safety of patients, or the safety and health of users and others. In addition, the device must achieve the performances intended by the manufacturer and be designed, manufactured, and packaged in a suitable manner. To demonstrate compliance with the essential requirements we must undergo a conformity assessment procedure, which varies according to the type of medical device and its (risk) classification. As a general rule, demonstration of conformity of in vitro diagnostic medical devices and their manufacturers with the essential requirements must be based, among other things, on the evaluation of clinical data supporting the safety and performance of the products during normal conditions of use. Specifically, a manufacturer must demonstrate that the device achieves its intended performance during normal conditions of use, that the known and foreseeable risks, and any adverse events, are minimized and acceptable when weighed against the benefits of its intended performance, and that any claims made about the performance and safety of the device are supported by suitable evidence.

Table of Contents

Except for (general) in vitro diagnostic medical devices, where the manufacturer can self-declare the conformity of its products with the essential requirements of the IVDD, a conformity assessment procedure requires the intervention of a notified body. Notified bodies are independent organizations designated by EU member states to assess the conformity of devices before being placed on the market. The Notified Body would typically audit and examine the product’s technical file and the manufacturer’s quality system (notified body must presume that quality systems which implement the relevant harmonized standards – which is ISO 13485:2016 for Quality Management Systems – conform to these requirements). If satisfied that the relevant product conforms to the relevant essential requirements, the notified body issues a certificate of conformity, which the manufacturer uses as a basis for its own declaration of conformity. The manufacturer may then apply the CE mark to the device, which allows the device to be placed on the market throughout the EU.

The aforementioned EU rules are generally applicable in the European Economic Area, or EEA, which consists of the 27 EU member states plus Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland.

Any delay or failure to obtain necessary regulatory approvals or clearances or certifications would have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

The FDA and foreign authorities or notified bodies can delay, limit or deny clearance or approval or certification of a device for many reasons, including:

•our inability to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the FDA, similar foreign authorities or notified bodies that our products are safe or effective for their intended uses;

•the disagreement of the FDA, similar foreign authorities or notified bodies with the design, conduct or implementation of our clinical studies or the analysis or interpretation of data from our pre-clinical or clinical studies;

•serious and unexpected adverse effects experienced by participants in our clinical studies;

•the data from our pre-clinical and clinical studies may be insufficient to support clearance or approval, or certification where required;

•our inability to demonstrate that the clinical and other benefits of any of our tests outweigh the risks;

•an advisory committee, if convened by the FDA, may recommend against approval of our PMA or other application for any of our tests or may recommend that the FDA require, as a condition of approval, additional pre-clinical studies or clinical studies, limitations on approved labeling or distribution and use restrictions, or even if an advisory committee, if convened, makes a favorable recommendation, the FDA may still not approve the test; Similar requirements may apply in foreign jurisdictions;

•the FDA, similar foreign authorities or notified bodies may identify deficiencies in our marketing application, or certification application and in our manufacturing processes, facilities or analytical methods or those of our third-party contract manufacturers;

•the potential for approval or certification policies or regulations of the FDA or similar foreign authorities to change significantly in a manner rendering our clinical data or regulatory filings insufficient for the clearance or approval or certification; and

•the FDA, similar foreign authorities or notified bodies may audit our clinical study data and conclude that the data is not sufficiently reliable to support a PMA or other applications.

If we are unable to obtain clearance or approval or certification for any tests for which we plan to seek clearance or approval or certification, our business may be harmed.

Table of Contents

Modifications to our FDA-cleared or approved products may require new 510(k) clearances or premarket approvals, or may require us to cease marketing or recall the modified products until clearances are obtained.

For any product approved pursuant to a PMA, we are required to seek supplemental approval for many types of changes to the approved product, for which we will need to determine whether a PMA supplement or other regulatory filing is needed or whether the change may be reported via the PMA Annual Report. Similarly, any modification to a 510(k)-cleared device that could significantly affect its safety or effectiveness, or that would constitute a major change in its intended use, design, or manufacture, requires new 510(k) clearance or, possibly, approval of a new PMA. The FDA requires us to make this determination in the first instance, but the FDA may review and may not agree with our determination. If the FDA disagrees with our determination and requires us to seek approvals or clearances for modifications to our previously approved or cleared products, for which we concluded that new approvals or clearances are unnecessary, we may be required to cease marketing or distribution of our products or to recall the modified product until we obtain the approval or clearance, and we may be subject to significant regulatory fines or penalties.

Similar requirements apply in foreign jurisdictions. For instance, in the EU, we must inform the notified body that carried out the conformity assessment of the devices that we market or sell in the EU and EEA of any planned substantial changes to our quality system or substantial changes to our in vitro diagnostic medical devices that could affect compliance with the essential requirements laid down in Annex I to IVDD or cause a substantial change to the intended use for which the device has been CE marked. The notified body will then assess the planned changes and verify whether they affect the products’ ongoing conformity with the IVDD. If the assessment is favorable, the notified body will issue a new certificate of conformity or an addendum to the existing certificate attesting compliance with the essential requirements and quality system requirements laid down in the Annexes to the IVDD.

If third-party payers, including commercial payers and government healthcare programs, do not provide coverage of, or adequate reimbursement for, our tests, our business and results of operations will be negatively affected.

Our revenue and commercial success depend on achieving coverage and reimbursement for our tests from payers, including both commercial and government payers. If payers do not provide coverage of, or do not provide adequate reimbursement for our tests, we may need to seek payment from the patient, which may adversely affect demand for our tests. Coverage determinations by a payer may depend on a number of factors, including but not limited to a payer’s determination that a test is appropriate, medically necessary or cost-effective. If we are unable to provide payers with sufficient evidence of the clinical utility and validity of our test, they may not provide coverage, may provide limited coverage or may terminate coverage, which will adversely affect our revenues and our financial condition. To the extent that more competitors enter our markets, the availability of coverage and the reimbursement rate for our tests may decrease as we encounter pricing pressure from our competitors.

Each payer makes its own decision as to whether to provide coverage for our tests, whether to enter into a contract with us and the reimbursement rate for a test. Negotiating with payers is time-consuming, and payers often insist on their standard form contracts. There is no guarantee that a payer will provide adequate coverage or reimbursement for our tests or that we can reach an agreement with the payer on reasonable terms without being subject to additional regulatory and compliance risks. In cases where there is no coverage, or we do not have a contracted rate for reimbursement with the payer, the patient is typically responsible for a greater share of the cost of the test, which may result in delay of revenue, increase collection costs or decrease the likelihood of collection. We maintain a financial assistance program, the Guardant Access Program, under which we assess patient financial need and offer provide discounted or no cost tests to certain patients. This may result in scrutiny by payers of our Guardant Access Program, and this could result in recoupment actions or termination of coverage of our tests.

Our claims for reimbursement may be denied and we may have to appeal such denials in order to get paid. Such appeals may not result in payment. Payers may perform audits of historically paid claims and attempt to recoup funds years after the funds were initially distributed if the payers believe the funds were paid in error or determine that our tests were medically unnecessary. If a payer's audit of our claims results in a negative finding, and we are unable to reverse the finding through appeal, any subsequent recoupment could result in a material adverse effect on our revenue. Additionally, in some cases commercial payers for whom we are not a participating provider may elect at any time to review claims previously paid and determine the amount they paid was excessive. In these situations, the payer typically notifies us of its decision and then offsets the amount it determines to be overpaid against amounts it owes us on current claims. We do not have a mechanism to dispute these retroactive adjustments, and we cannot predict when, or how often, a payer might engage in these reviews.

Table of Contents

When we contract with a payer as a participating provider, reimbursements by the payer are generally made pursuant to a negotiated fee schedule and are limited to only covered indications or where prior approval has been obtained. Becoming a participating provider can result in higher reimbursement amounts for covered uses of our test and, potentially, no reimbursement for non-covered uses identified under the payer’s policies or the contract.

Although we are a participating provider with some commercial payers, certain other large, national commercial payers, including Anthem, Aetna and Humana, have issued non-coverage policies that consider tissue and liquid CGP testing, including our Guardant360 test, as experimental or investigational. If we are not successful in obtaining coverage from such payers, or if other payers issue similar non-coverage policies, our business and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

Medicare’s National Coverage Determination, or NCD, for Next Generation Sequencing, or NGS, first established in 2018 and subsequently updated in 2020 states that NGS tests, such as our Guardant360 test, are covered by Medicare nationally, when: (1) performed in a CLIA-certified laboratory, (2) ordered by a treating physician, (3) the patient meets certain clinical and treatment criteria, including having recurrent, relapsed, refractory, metastatic, or advanced stages III or IV cancer, (4) the test is approved or cleared by the FDA as a companion in vitro diagnostic for an FDA approved or cleared indication for use in that patient’s cancer, and (5) results are provided to the treating physician for management of the patient using a report template to specify treatment options. The NGS NCD also states that each Medicare Administrative Contractor, or MAC, may provide local coverage of other next-generation sequencing tests for cancer patients only when the test is performed by a CLIA-certified laboratory, ordered by a treating physician and the patient meets the same clinical and treatment criteria required of nationally covered next-generation sequencing tests under the NGS NCD. An NGS test is not covered by Medicare when cancer patients do not have the above-noted indications for cancer under either national or local coverage criteria. In July 2018, Palmetto GBA, or Palmetto, the MAC responsible for administering Medicare’s Molecular Diagnostic Services Program, or MolDx, issued a local coverage determination, or LCD, for our Guardant360 test for NSCLC patients who meet certain clinical and treatment criteria. Subsequently, in 2018, Noridian Healthcare Solutions, the MAC responsible for adjudicating claims in California, where our laboratory is located, and a participant in MolDx, finalized its LCD for our Guardant360 test. In September 2018, we began to receive reimbursement from Medicare for claims submitted with respect to Guardant360 clinical tests performed for NSCLC patients. In December 2019, replacing its prior NSCLC patient LCD, Palmetto GBA finalized its expanded LCD for our Guardant360 test that provides limited Medicare coverage for use of the Guardant360 test for qualifying patients diagnosed with solid cancers of non-central nervous system origin. In May 2019, Noridian also issued an expanded draft LCD for our Guardant360 test consistent with the expanded draft LCD issued by Palmetto in March 2019. In May 2020, Noridian issued a coverage article and confirmed limited Medicare coverage for our Guardant360 test for qualifying patients diagnosed with solid tumor cancers of non-central nervous system origin who meet the criteria of the NGS NCD. Noridian also retired the expanded draft LCD issued in May 2019 as being superseded by the coverage article. Future actions taken by Noridian or Palmetto may change Medicare coverage for our Guardant360 test. In March 2020, we began to receive reimbursement from Medicare for claims submitted, with respect to Guardant360 clinical tests performed for qualifying patients diagnosed with solid tumor cancers of non-central nervous system origin other than NSCLC.

Table of Contents

Under Medicare, payment for laboratory tests like ours is generally made under the Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule, or CLFS, with payment amounts assigned to specific procedure billing codes. In April 2014, Congress passed the Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014, or PAMA, which included substantial changes to the way in which clinical laboratory services are paid under Medicare. Under PAMA, laboratories that receive the majority of their Medicare revenue from payments made under the CLFS are generally required to report to CMS, beginning in 2017 and every three years thereafter (or annually for “advanced diagnostic laboratory tests”, or ADLT), commercial payer payment rates and volumes for each test they perform. CMS uses this data to calculate a weighted median payment rate for each test, which is used to establish revised Medicare CLFS reimbursement rates for the test. Laboratories that fail to report the required payment information may be subject to substantial civil monetary penalties. We are subject to reporting requirements under PAMA and the Medicare rate for our tests will be calculated in the future based on our private payer rates. For clinical diagnostic laboratory tests furnished on or after January 1, 2018, their Medicare CLFS reimbursement rates are established upon these reported private payer rates. On December 10, 2021, Congress passed the Protecting Medicare and American Farmers from Sequester Cuts Act, which delayed by one year the next data reporting period and prevented any reduction in payment amounts from commercial payer rate implementation in 2022. On November 2, 2022, CMS published its final rule for the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule for calendar year (CY) 2023, including changes for clinical laboratories that take effect on January 1, 2023. Changes include updated regulatory definitions to specify the data collection period for the data reporting period of January 1, 2023 through March 31, 2023; revisions to indicate that data reporting is required every 3 years beginning January 2023; and to confirm that for CY 2022, payment may not be reduced by more than 0% as compared to CY 2021, and for CYs 2023 through 2025, payment may not be reduced by more than 15% as compared to the amount established for the preceding year. On December 29, 2022, Congress passed the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, which prevented any reduction in payment amounts from commercial payor rate implementation for 2023; delayed by one year data reporting requirements for tests other than ADLTs; and extended the three-year period in which payment may not be reduced by more than 15%, to CYs 2024 through 2026. If we are unable to obtain and maintain favorable reimbursement rates from commercial payers for our tests, this may adversely affect the tests’ Medicare reimbursement rates. It is unclear what impact new Medicare pricing structures, such as those adopted under PAMA, may have on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Some payers have implemented, or are in the process of implementing, laboratory benefit management programs, often using third-party benefit managers to manage these programs. The stated goals of these programs are to help improve the quality of outpatient laboratory services, support evidence-based guidelines for patient care and lower costs. The impact on laboratories, such as us, of active laboratory benefit management by third parties is unclear, and we expect that it would have a negative impact on our revenue in the short term. Payers may resist reimbursement for our tests in favor of less expensive tests, require pre-authorization for our tests, or impose additional pricing pressure on and substantial administrative burden for reimbursement for our tests. We expect to continue to focus substantial resources on increasing adoption of, and coverage and reimbursement for, our current tests and any future tests we may develop. We believe it may take several years to achieve broad coverage and adequate contracted reimbursement with a majority of payers for our tests. However, we cannot predict whether, under what circumstances, or at what price levels payers will cover and reimburse our tests. If we fail to establish and maintain broad adoption of, and coverage and reimbursement for, our tests, our ability to generate revenue could be harmed and our business and prospects could suffer.

Table of Contents

Our products may in the future be subject to product recalls. A recall of our products, either voluntarily or at the direction of the FDA or another governmental authority, or the discovery of serious safety issues with our products, could have a significant adverse impact on us.

The FDA has the authority to require the recall of commercialized products that are subject to FDA regulation in the event of material deficiencies or defects in design or manufacture. The authority to require a recall must be based on an FDA finding that there is reasonable probability that the device would cause serious, adverse health consequences or death. We may also, on our own initiative, recall a product. The FDA requires that certain classifications of recalls be reported to the FDA within ten working days after the recall is initiated. In the case of our FDA-approved tests, a government-mandated or voluntary recall by us or one of our distributors could occur as a result of an unacceptable risk to health, component failures, malfunctions, manufacturing errors, design or labeling defects or other deficiencies and issues. Recalls of any of our products could impair our ability to produce our products in a cost-effective and timely manner, which would have an adverse effect on our reputation, results of operations and financial condition. We may be subject to liability claims, may be required to bear costs or may take other actions that may have a negative impact on our future sales and our ability to generate profits. Companies are required to maintain certain records of recalls, even if they are not reportable to the FDA. We may initiate voluntary recalls involving our products in the future that we determine do not require notification to the FDA. If the FDA disagrees with our determinations, the FDA could require us to report those actions and take enforcement action for failing to report the recalls when they were conducted. Similar requirements apply in foreign jurisdictions. A future recall announcement could harm our reputation with customers and negatively affect our sales and financial condition.

If we initiate a correction or removal for one of our tests, issue a safety alert or undertake a field action or recall to reduce a risk to health imposed by the test, this could lead to increased scrutiny by the FDA and our customers regarding the quality and safety of our tests and to negative publicity, including FDA alerts, press releases or administrative or judicial actions. Furthermore, circulation of any such negative publicity could harm our reputation, be used by competitors against us in competitive situations and cause customers to delay purchase decisions or cancel orders.

Clinical development involves a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome, and results of earlier studies and studies may not be predictive of future study results.

Our ongoing research and development and clinical study activities are subject to extensive regulation and review by numerous governmental authorities both in the United States and abroad; and by notified bodies in some foreign jurisdictions. Clinical testing is difficult to design and implement, can take many years, can be expensive and carries uncertain outcomes. The results of nonclinical and clinical studies of our products conducted to date, and ongoing or future studies of our current, planned or future products may not be predictive of the results of later clinical studies, and interim results of a clinical study do not necessarily predict final results. The data and results from our clinical studies does not ensure that we will achieve similar results in future clinical studies. Failure can occur at any stage of clinical testing. Clinical studies may produce negative or inconclusive results, and we may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional clinical and nonclinical testing in addition to those we have planned before we are able to seek marketing authorizations or certifications for our products or product candidates.

We may experience delays in our clinical studies for a number of reasons, which could adversely affect the costs, timing or successful completion of such clinical studies.

Patient enrollment in clinical studies and completion of patient follow up depend on many factors, including the size of the patient population, the nature of the study protocol, the proximity of patients to clinical sites, the eligibility criteria for the clinical study, patient compliance, competing clinical studies and clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages of the product being studied in relation to other available products. In addition, patients participating in our clinical studies may drop out before completion of the study or experience adverse medical events unrelated to our products. Delays in patient enrollment or failure of patients to continue to participate in a clinical study may delay commencement or completion of the clinical study, cause an increase in the costs of the clinical study and delays, or result in the failure of the clinical study. In addition, the target enrollment for certain of our clinical studies, including our ECLIPSE study, is based upon our estimates that a given percentage of enrolled patients will have a specified disease or condition, and we cannot be certain that these estimates will prove correct, or that our clinical studies, even if fully enrolled, will produce data sufficient to support the submission of a PMA or other marketing application to the FDA or a comparable regulatory authority. If our clinical studies do not enroll a sufficient number of patients to support submission of a PMA or similar marketing application, or if the number of patients enrolled with the target disease or condition is lower than we estimated, we may be required to enroll additional patients in our clinical studies or conduct additional clinical studies before we are able to seek and/or obtain marketing authorizations for our product candidates, which may result in significant additional expenses for us and could delay or prevent us from bringing our product candidates to market.

Table of Contents

In addition, we may find it necessary to engage CROs to perform data collection and analysis and other aspects of our clinical studies, which might increase the cost and complexity of our studies. We may also depend on clinical investigators, medical institutions and contract research organizations to perform the studies, and would control only certain aspects of their activities. We would be responsible for ensuring that each of our studies is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards, and our reliance on third parties would not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and our third-party contractors are required to comply with good clinical practices, or GCPs, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA, and comparable regulations enforced by foreign regulatory authorities for products in clinical development. Regulatory authorities enforce these GCPs through periodic inspections of study sponsors, principal investigators and study sites. If we or any third-party contractor fails to comply with applicable GCPs, the clinical data generated in clinical studies may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities or notified bodies may require us to perform additional clinical studies before clearing, or approving our marketing applications or certifying our products. A failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical studies, which would delay the regulatory clearance, approval or certification process.

If there are delays in testing or clearances, approvals or certifications as a result of the failure to perform by third parties, our research and development costs would increase, and we may not be able to obtain regulatory clearance, approval, or certification for our tests. In addition, we may not be able to establish or maintain relationships with these parties on favorable terms, if at all. Each of these outcomes would harm our ability to market our tests, generate revenue or to achieve sustained profitability.

Interim, "topline" and preliminary data from our clinical studies that we announce or publish from time to time may change as more patient data become available and are subject to audit and verification procedures that could result in material changes in the final data.

From time to time, we may publicly disclose preliminary or topline data from our preclinical studies or clinical studies, which is based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following a more comprehensive review of the data related to the particular study. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data at time of disclosure. As a result, the topline or preliminary results that we report may differ from future results of the same studies, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. Topline data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result, topline data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available.

From time to time, we may also disclose interim data from our preclinical and clinical studies. Interim data from clinical studies that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available. Adverse differences between preliminary, topline or interim data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects. Further, disclosure of such data by us or by our competitors could result in volatility in the price of our common stock.

Further, others, including regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, may not accept or agree with our assumptions, estimates, calculations, conclusions or analyses or may interpret or weigh the importance of data differently, which could impact the value of the particular program, the approvability or commercialization of the particular product candidate or product and our company in general. In addition, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular clinical study is based on what is typically extensive information, and you or others may not agree with what we determine is material or otherwise appropriate information to include in our disclosure and any information we determine not to disclose may ultimately be deemed significant with respect to future decisions, conclusions, views, activities or otherwise regarding a particular product, product candidate or our business.

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

Table of Contents

Our “research use only” and “investigational use only” products could become subject to more onerous regulation by the FDA or other regulatory agencies in the future, which could increase our costs and delay our commercialization efforts, thereby materially and adversely affecting our business and results of operations.

In the United States, some of our products, including our GuardantOMNI test, are currently available for research use only, or RUO, or for investigational use only, or IUO, depending on the proposed application. We make our RUO and IUO products available to a variety of parties, including biopharmaceutical companies and research institutes. Because RUO and IUO products are not intended for use in clinical practice and cannot be advertised or promoted for clinical or diagnostic claims, they are exempt from many regulatory requirements otherwise applicable to medical devices. In particular, while the FDA regulations require that RUO products be labeled “For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures,” and that IUO products be labeled “For Investigational Use Only. The performance characteristics of this product have not been established,” such products are not subject to the FDA’s pre- and post-market controls for medical devices.

A significant change in the laws or policies governing RUO or IUO products or how they are enforced may require us to change our business model in order to maintain compliance. For instance, in November 2013 the FDA issued a guidance document entitled “Distribution of In Vitro Diagnostic Products Labeled for Research Use Only or Investigational Use Only,” or the RUO/IUO Guidance, which highlights the FDA’s interpretation that distribution of RUO or IUO products with any labeling, advertising or promotion that suggests that clinical laboratories can validate the test through their own procedures and subsequently offer it for clinical diagnostic use as an LDT is in conflict with the RUO or IUO status. The RUO/IUO Guidance further articulates the FDA’s position that any assistance offered in performing clinical validation or verification, or similar specialized technical support, to clinical laboratories, is in conflict with RUO or IUO status. If we engage in any activities that the FDA deems to be in conflict with the RUO or IUO status held by any of our products so labeled, we may be subject to immediate, severe and broad FDA enforcement action that would adversely affect our ability to continue operations. Accordingly, if the FDA finds that we are distributing our RUO or IUO products in a manner that is inconsistent with its RUO/IUO Guidance, we may be forced to stop distribution of our RUO/IUO tests until we are in compliance, which would reduce our revenue, increase our costs and adversely affect our business, and results of operations.

Even if we receive regulatory approval or certification of our products, we will continue to be subject to extensive regulatory oversight.

Medical devices are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA in the United States, the MHLW in Japan, the European authorities, EEA competent authorities, and comparable regulatory agencies in other territories where we do business. If any of our products are approved by the FDA, the MHLW, or other comparable foreign regulatory agencies or certified by notified bodies in foreign jurisdictions, we will be required to timely file various reports. If these reports are not filed timely, regulators may impose sanctions and sales of our products may suffer, and we may be subject to product liability or regulatory enforcement actions, all of which could harm our business. In addition, as a condition of approving a PMA, the FDA may also require some form of post-approval study or post-market surveillance, whereby the applicant conducts a follow-up study or follows certain patient groups for a number of years and makes periodic reports to the FDA on the clinical status of those patients when necessary to protect the public health or to provide additional safety and effectiveness data for the device. The product labeling must be updated and submitted in a PMA supplement as results, including any adverse event data from the post-approval study, become available. Failure to conduct or timely complete post-approval studies in compliance with applicable regulations, update the product labeling, or comply with other post-approval requirements could result in withdrawal of approval of the PMA, which would harm our business and revenue.

The FDA and the Federal Trade Commission, or FTC, also regulate the advertising and promotion of medical devices to ensure that their promotional claims made are consistent with the applicable marketing authorizations, that there are adequate and reasonable data to substantiate the claims, and that the promotional labeling and advertising is neither false nor misleading in any respect. If the FDA or FTC determines that any of our promotional claims are false, misleading, not substantiated or not permissible, we may be subject to enforcement actions and we may be required to revise our promotional claims and make other corrections or restitutions. Similar requirements apply in foreign jurisdictions.

The FDA, state and foreign authorities have broad enforcement powers. Our failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements could result in enforcement action by the FDA, state or foreign regulatory agencies, which may include any of the following sanctions:

•adverse publicity, warning letters, untitled letters, fines, injunctions, consent decrees and civil penalties;

Table of Contents

•repair, replacement, refunds, recalls, termination of distribution, administrative detention or seizures of our products;

•operating restrictions, partial suspension or total shutdown of production;

•customer notifications or repair, replacement or refunds;

•refusing our requests for clearances or approvals of new products, new intended uses or modifications to existing products;

•withdrawals of current clearances, approvals or certifications, resulting in prohibitions on sales of our products;

•refusal to issue certificates needed to export products for sale in other countries; and

•criminal prosecution.

Any of these sanctions could also result in higher than anticipated costs or lower than anticipated sales of our products and have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, results of operations and financial condition.

In addition, the FDA may change its clearance and approval policies, adopt additional regulations or revise existing regulations, or take other actions which may prevent or delay approval or clearance of our current or future products under development. For example, on February 23, 2022, the FDA issued a proposed rule to amend the Quality System Regulation, or QSR, which establishes current good manufacturing practice requirements for medical device manufacturers, to align more closely with the International Organization for Standardization, or ISO, standards. This proposal has not yet been finalized or adopted. Accordingly, it is unclear the extent to which any proposals, if adopted, could impose increased costs of compliance, or otherwise negatively affect our business. Additionally, in September 2019, the FDA issued revised final guidance describing an optional “safety and performance based” premarket review pathway for manufacturers of “certain, well-understood device types” to demonstrate substantial equivalence under the 510(k) clearance pathway by showing that such device meets objective safety and performance criteria established by the FDA, thereby obviating the need for manufacturers to compare the safety and performance of their medical devices to specific predicate devices in the clearance process. The FDA maintains a list device types appropriate for the “safety and performance based” pathway and continues to develop product-specific guidance documents that identify the performance criteria for each such device type, as well as recommended testing methods, where feasible. The FDA may establish performance criteria for classes of devices similar to ours, and it is unclear the extent to which such performance standards, if established, could impact our ability to obtain marketing authorization or otherwise create competition that may negatively affect our business.

In addition, FDA regulations and guidance are often revised or reinterpreted by the FDA in ways that may significantly affect our business and our products. Any new statutes, regulations or revisions or reinterpretations of existing regulations may impose additional costs or lengthen review times of any product candidates or make it more difficult to obtain marketing authorizations for, manufacture, market or distribute any product candidate we are developing. We cannot determine what effect changes in regulations, statutes, legal interpretation or policies, when and if promulgated, enacted or adopted may have on our business in the future. Such changes could, among other things, require: additional testing prior to seeking marketing authorization, changes to manufacturing methods recalls, replacement or discontinuance of our products or additional record keeping.

The FDA’s and other regulatory authorities’ policies may change and additional government regulations may be promulgated that could prevent, limit or delay marketing authorization of any product candidates we develop. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may be subject to enforcement action and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.

The EU regulatory landscape concerning medical devices (including in vitro diagnostic medical devices) is evolving. On April 5, 2017 Regulation (EU) 2017/746 of the European Parliament and of the Council on in vitro diagnostic medical devices and repealing Directive 98/79/EC and Commission Decision 2010/227/EU, or the IVDR, was adopted to establish a modernized and more robust EU legislative framework, with the aim of ensuring better protection of public health and patient safety. Unlike directives, the IVDR does not need to be transposed into national law and therefore reduces the risk of discrepancies in interpretation across the different European markets.

The IVDR will become applicable five years after publication (on May 26, 2022). However, on October 14, 2021, the European Commission proposed a “progressive” roll-out of the IVDR to prevent disruption in the supply of in vitro diagnostic medical devices. Consequently, if the European Parliament and Council adopt the proposed regulation, the IVDR will fully apply on May 26, 2022 but there will be a tiered system extending the grace period for many devices (depending on their risk classification) before they have to be fully compliant with the regulation.

Table of Contents

These modifications may have an effect on the way we conduct our business in the EU and the EEA.

Changes in funding for, or disruptions caused by global health concerns impacting, the FDA and other government agencies or notified bodies could hinder their ability to hire and retain key leadership and other personnel, or otherwise prevent new medical device products from being developed, authorized or commercialized in a timely manner, which could negatively impact our business.

The ability of the FDA, foreign regulatory authorities and notified bodies to review and authorize the sale or certify new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels; its ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees; statutory, regulatory, and policy changes; and other events that may otherwise affect the FDA’s foreign regulatory authorities’ and notified bodies’ ability to perform routine functions. Average review times at the FDA have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable. Disruptions at the FDA, other agencies and notified bodies may also slow the time necessary for new devices, including in vitro diagnostics to be reviewed and/or authorized or certified for marketing by necessary government agencies or notified bodies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, have had to furlough critical FDA employees and stop critical activities.

Separately, in response to the global COVID-19 pandemic, the FDA postponed most inspections of domestic and foreign manufacturing facilities at various points. Even though the FDA has since resumed standard inspection operations of domestic facilities where feasible, the FDA has continued to monitor and implement changes to its inspectional activities to ensure the safety of its employees and those of the firms it regulates as it adapts to the evolving COVID-19 pandemic, and any resurgence of the virus or emergence of new variants may lead to further inspectional delays. Other regulatory authorities may adopt similar restrictions or other policy measures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, or if global health concerns continue to prevent the FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting business as usual or conducting inspections, reviews or other regulatory activities, 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.

In the EU, notified bodies must be officially designated to certify products and services in accordance with the IVDR. Only a few notified bodies have been designated so far and the COVID-19 pandemic has significantly slowed down their designation process. Without IVDR designation, notified bodies may not yet start certifying devices in accordance with the new Regulation. As only a few notified bodies has been IVDR-designated they are facing a heavy workload and their review times have lengthened. This situation could impact the way we are conducting or intend to conduct our business in the EU and the EEA.

Failure to comply with federal, state and foreign laboratory licensing requirements and the applicable requirements of the FDA or any other regulatory authority, could cause us to lose the ability to perform our tests, experience disruptions to our business, or become subject to administrative or judicial sanctions.

We are subject to the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments, or CLIA, a federal law that regulates clinical laboratories that perform testing on specimens derived from humans for the purpose of providing information for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of disease. CLIA regulations establish specific standards with respect to personnel qualifications, facility administration, proficiency testing, quality control, quality assurance and inspections. Any testing subject to CLIA regulation must be performed in a CLIA certified laboratory. CLIA certification is also required in order for us to be eligible to bill state and federal healthcare programs, as well as commercial payers, for our tests. We have a current CLIA certification to perform our tests at our laboratory in Redwood City, California. To maintain this certificate, we are subject to survey and inspection every two years. Moreover, CLIA inspectors may make random inspections of our laboratory from time to time.

We are also required to maintain a California clinical laboratory license to perform testing in California. California laboratory laws establish standards for day-to-day operation of our clinical laboratory in Redwood City, California, including the training and skills required of personnel and quality control. In addition, some other states require our California laboratory to be licensed in the state in order to test specimens from those states. In addition to California, our laboratory is licensed in Florida, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island and New York. Although we have obtained licenses from states where we believe we are required to be licensed, it is possible that other states we are not aware of currently require out-of-state laboratories to obtain licensure in order to test specimens from the state, and that other states may adopt similar requirements in the future.

Table of Contents

We may also be subject to regulations in foreign jurisdictions as we seek to expand international utilization of our tests or as such jurisdictions adopt new licensure requirements, which may require review of our tests in order to offer them or may have other limitations such as restrictions on the transport of specimens necessary for us to perform our tests that may limit our ability to make our tests available outside of the United States. Complying with licensure requirements in new jurisdictions may be expensive, time-consuming and subject us to significant and unanticipated delays.

Failure to comply with applicable clinical laboratory licensure requirements may result in a range of enforcement actions, including suspension, limitation or revocation of our CLIA certification and/or state licenses, imposition of a directed plan of action, on-site monitoring, civil monetary penalties, criminal sanctions, inability to receive reimbursement from Medicare, Medicaid and commercial payers, as well as significant adverse publicity. Any sanction imposed under CLIA, its implementing regulations, or state or foreign laws or regulations governing clinical laboratory licensure or our failure to renew our CLIA certification, a state or foreign license or accreditation, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Even if we were able to bring our laboratory back into compliance, we could incur significant expenses and potentially lose revenue in doing so.

In order to test specimens from New York, LDTs must be approved by the New York State Department of Health, or NYSDOH, on a product-by-product basis before they are offered, and our Guardant360 test has been approved by NYSDOH. We will need to seek NYSDOH approval of any future LDTs we develop and want to offer for clinical testing to New York residents, and there can be no assurance that we will be able to obtain such approval. As a result, we are subject to periodic inspection by the NYSDOH a