10-K 1 tm211144d1_10k.htm FORM 10-K

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

x Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020

¨ 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: 001-34058

CAPRICOR THERAPEUTICS, INC.

(Exact Name Of Registrant As Specified In Its Charter)

Delaware		88-0363465
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)		(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

8840 Wilshire Blvd., 2^nd Floor, Beverly Hills, California 90211

(Address of principal executive offices including zip code)

(310) 358-3200
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

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 $0.001 per share		CAPR		The Nasdaq Capital 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 x No

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. ¨ Yes x 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. x 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 x 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 x	Smaller reporting company x
		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 USC. 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 x No

The aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 30, 2020 was approximately $86,525,913, based on the last reported sale of the registrant’s common stock on The Nasdaq Capital Market on June 30, 2020 of $4.60 per share.

As of March 12, 2021, there were 22,797,930 shares of the registrant’s common stock, par value $0.001 per share, issued and outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K incorporates information by reference from the definitive proxy statement for the registrant’s 2021 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

		Page
Part I
Item 1.	Business	3
Item 1A.	Risk Factors	29
Item 1B.	Unresolved Staff Comments	72
Item 2.	Properties	72
Item 3.	Legal Proceedings	73
Item 4	Mine Safety Disclosures	73

Part II
Item 5.	Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities	74
Item 6.	Selected Financial Data	75
Item 7.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	76
Item 7A.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk	89
Item 8.	Financial Statements and Supplementary Data	90
Item 9.	Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure	116
Item 9A.	Controls and Procedures	116
Item 9B.	Other Information	117

Part III
Item 10.	Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance	118
Item 11.	Executive Compensation	118
Item 12.	Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management	118
Item 13.	Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence	118
Item 14.	Principal Accountant Fees and Services	118

Part IV
Item 15.	Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules	119
Item 16.	Form 10-K Summary	123

SIGNATURES		124
INDEX OF EXHIBITS FILED WITH THIS REPORT

References to “the Company,” “Capricor Therapeutics,” “we,” “us” or “our” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K refer to Capricor Therapeutics, Inc., a Delaware corporation, and its subsidiaries, unless the context indicates otherwise. References to “Capricor” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K refer to our wholly owned subsidiary, Capricor, Inc., unless the context indicates otherwise.

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, or the Securities Act, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or the Exchange Act. The forward-looking statements are only predictions and provide our current expectations or forecasts of future events and financial performance and may be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology, including the terms “believes,” “estimates,” “anticipates,” “expects,” “plans,” “potential,” “projects,” “intends,” “may,” “will” or “should” or, in each case, their negative, or other variations or comparable terminology, though the absence of these words does not necessarily mean that a statement is not forward-looking. Forward-looking statements include all matters that are not historical facts and include, without limitation, statements about the development of our drug and vaccine candidates, including when we expect to undertake, initiate and complete clinical trials of our product candidates; expectation of or dates for commencement of clinical trials, investigational new drug filings, similar plans or projections; the regulatory approval of our drug and vaccine candidates; our use of clinical research centers, third party manufacturers and other contractors; our ability to find collaborative partners for research, development and commercialization of potential products; our ability to manufacture products for clinical and commercial use; our ability to protect our patents and other intellectual property; our ability to market any of our products; our projected operating losses; the impact of taxes on our business, including our ability to utilize net operating losses; our ability to utilize our ability to compete against other companies and research institutions; the effect of potential strategic transactions on our business; acceptance of our products by doctors, patients or payors and the availability of reimbursement for our product candidates; our ability to attract and retain key personnel; the volatility of our stock price; our ability to continue as a going concern; and other risks and uncertainties detailed in the section of this Annual Report on Form 10-K entitled “Risk Factors”. These statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results and events to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. We caution the reader not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which reflect management’s analysis only as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

We intend that all forward-looking statements be subject to the safe-harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements are subject to many risks and uncertainties that could cause our actual results to differ materially from any future results expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. Pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials, even after obtaining promising earlier trial results and preclinical studies. Data obtained from such clinical trials are susceptible to varying interpretations, which could delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. Readers are expressly advised to review and consider certain risk factors, which include risks associated with (1) our ability to successfully conduct clinical and preclinical trials for our product candidates, (2) our ability to obtain required regulatory approvals to develop, manufacture and market our product candidates, either on an accelerated basis or at all, (3) our ability to raise additional capital or to license our products on favorable terms, (4) our ability to execute our development plan on time and on budget, (5) our ability to identify and obtain additional product candidates, (6) our ability to raise enough capital to fund our operations, (7) our ability to protect our intellectual property rights, and (8) our compliance with legal and regulatory requirements as a public company. Although we believe that the assumptions underlying the forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K are reasonable, any of the assumptions could be inaccurate, and therefore there can be no assurance that such statements will be accurate. In light of the significant uncertainties inherent in the forward-looking statements included herein, the inclusion of such information should not be regarded as a representation by us or any other person that the results or conditions described in such statements or our objectives and plans will be achieved. Furthermore, past performance in operations and share price is not necessarily indicative of future performance. Except to the extent required by applicable laws or rules, we do not undertake to update any forward-looking statements or to announce publicly revisions to any of our forward-looking statements, whether resulting from new information, future events or otherwise.

The following discussion should be read together with our consolidated financial statements and related consolidated notes contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Results for the year ended December 31, 2020 are not necessarily indicative of results that may be attained in the future.

PART I

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

Company Overview

Capricor Therapeutics, Inc. is a biotechnology company focused on the development of transformative cell- and exosome-based therapeutics for the treatment and prevention of a broad spectrum of diseases.

Cell Therapy (CAP-1002) Program

CAP-1002 - Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy Program

We have completed HOPE-2, a Phase II clinical trial in the United States with our product candidate, CAP-1002, a cardiac cell derived therapy which was used to treat patients with late-stage Duchenne muscular dystrophy, or DMD. The 12-month final top-line data showed improvements in multiple measures of upper limb, cardiac and respiratory functions. Following receipt of the 12-month data, we discussed this program with the FDA in a Type B meeting focusing on the data, next steps and a pathway to approval of a Biologics License Application, or BLA, for CAP-1002 in DMD. The FDA has continued to encourage us to conduct a Phase III study; at this time, however, we are still discussing the pathway forward for this program with the FDA and have not initiated a Phase III study. Additionally, we are actively seeking partners for this program.

CAP-1002 - COVID-19 Program

In 2020, under an Expanded Access (or Compassionate Use) program, seven patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19 (also referred to sometimes as SARS-CoV-2) symptoms, six of whom were ventilated, were treated with CAP-1002. Four of the seven patients were fully discharged and three died between one- and two-months post-treatment. Previously published data has shown that COVID-19 patients on ventilators experience higher mortality rates. While we are unable to definitively ascertain whether CAP-1002 improved patient outcomes, by analyzing blood samples and other tests, it was determined that CAP-1002 was associated with identifiable improvements in certain patients such as a decrease in white blood cell count, a decrease in IL-6, a decrease in C-reactive protein, and/or reduced reliance on supplemental oxygen. However, the efficacy of CAP-1002 in treating COVID-19 was not demonstrated due to the small sample size, the fact that seven patients were contemporaneously on other experimental medications, and the lack of an established control group, among other factors.

In August 2020, we received FDA acceptance of our IND application for a clinical study of CAP-1002 in patients with severe or critical COVID-19. The INSPIRE trial is a Phase II, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study that is enrolling up to 60 patients from several trial sites in the United States. The study is enrolling patients who have a diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 and require supplemental oxygen. Various outcome measures will be analyzed including, but not limited to, safety, cytokine biomarkers, all-cause mortality, cardiac biomarkers and hospitalization length. We expect to have top-line data available in the third quarter of 2021. Following receipt of this data, we will discuss next steps for the program with FDA. Additionally, we are actively seeking partners for this program.

Exosomes Program

Exosome-Based Vaccines

We are currently engaged in the development of two vaccine candidates for the potential prevention of COVID-19. The first vaccine candidate is a tripartite exosome-mRNA vaccine which is designed to elicit a protective, long-lasting immune response to SARS-CoV-2 by targeting multiple structural proteins of the virus. In December 2020, we announced positive preclinical data from a study using our exosome-mRNA vaccine approach We recently met with the FDA in a pre-IND meeting and are planning on filing an IND by the third quarter of 2021, subject to regulatory approval, for this vaccine for SARS-CoV-2. We have also been investigating an exosomal antigen vaccine which is a vesicle-based, nucleic acid-free formulation carrying multiple structural proteins of SARS-CoV-2.

Exosome-Based Therapeutics

We are also developing our exosomes platform technology as a next-generation therapeutic platform. Our current focus is on the development of exosomes loaded with nucleic acids, including mRNA, to treat a variety of diseases. mRNA medicines are not small molecules, like traditional pharmaceutical drugs and they are not traditional biologics (such as recombinant proteins and monoclonal antibodies) – which were the origins of the biotech industry. Instead, mRNA medicines are sets of instructions. And these instructions direct cells in the body to make all the proteins required for life as well as to prevent or fight disease.

Our platform builds on advances in fundamental RNA science, targeting technology and manufacturing, providing us the opportunity to build a broad pipeline of potential new therapeutic candidates. At this time, we are developing therapeutics and vaccines for infectious diseases, monogenic diseases and other indications.

CDC-Derived Exosomes (CAP-2003)

In April 2020, we filed an IND with the FDA to investigate the use of CAP-2003 in patients with DMD. At this time, the FDA has requested more information related to manufacturing and we are evaluating the next steps for this program. We need to submit further information to FDA to support the potential acceptance of this IND.

Additionally, in July 2018, we entered into a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement with the U.S. Army Institute of Surgical Research, or USAISR, pursuant to which we agreed to cooperate in research and development on the evaluation of our CAP-2003 for the treatment of trauma related injuries and conditions.

Aspects of our exosomes pipeline have been supported through collaborations and alliances. We have entered into a Sponsored Research Agreement with Johns Hopkins University, or JHU, pursuant to which researchers in the lab of Dr. Stephen Gould will perform certain research activities in connection with our exosomes program and the further development of the platform. Additional collaborations include the Department of Defense, the National Institutes of Health and Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, or CSMC.

Our executive offices are located at 8840 Wilshire Blvd., 2^nd Floor, Beverly Hills, California 90211. Our telephone number is (310) 358-3200 and our Internet address is www.capricor.com.

Our Technologies

Cardiosphere-Derived Cells (CAP-1002)

Our core cell therapy technology is based on cardiosphere-derived cells, or CDCs, a cardiac-derived cell therapy that was first identified in the academic laboratory of Capricor’s scientific founder, Dr. Eduardo Marbán. Since the initial publication in 2007, CDCs have been the subject of over 100 peer-reviewed scientific publications and have been administered to over 200 human subjects across several clinical trials. CDCs have been shown to exert potent immunomodulatory activity and to alter the immune system’s activity to encourage cellular regeneration. We have been developing allogeneic CDCs (CAP-1002) as a product candidate for the treatment of DMD and investigating their effects on skeletal and cardiac function. Preclinical and clinical data support the therapeutic concept of administering CDCs as a means to address conditions in which the heart or skeletal muscle has been damaged.

In a variety of preclinical experimental models of heart injury, CDCs have been shown to stimulate cell proliferation and blood vessel growth and to inhibit programmed cell death and scar formation. Published data by CSMC, which tested the effectiveness of CDCs in a mouse model of DMD, showed for the first time that the skeletal and cardiac improvements could be directly attributed to treatment with CDCs. The data also provide further evidence of the potential of CDCs to stimulate tissue repair and regeneration by first reducing inflammation, which then enables new healthy muscle to form, as was shown in the mouse model of DMD.

CDCs are derived from cardiospheres, or CSps, which are self-adherent multicellular clusters derived from the heart. CDCs are sufficiently small that, within acceptable dose limits, they can be infused into a coronary artery or into the peripheral vasculature. Capricor has performed clinical studies to establish the range of CDC dose levels that appear to be safe via intracoronary administration and peripheral venous access.

While CDCs originate from either a deceased human donor (allogeneic source) or from heart tissue taken directly from recipient patients themselves (autologous source), the methods for manufacturing CDCs from either source are similar.

Capricor’s proprietary manufacturing methods are focused on producing therapeutic doses of CDCs to boost the regenerative capacity of the heart and skeletal muscles, with the goal of improving cardiac and skeletal muscle function. Capricor has exclusively licensed intellectual property covering CDCs and CSps from three academic institutions and is also pursuing its own intellectual property rights relating to CDCs as a product candidate.

Exosomes

Extracellular vesicles, including exosomes and microvesicles, are nano-scale, membrane-enclosed vesicles which are secreted by most cells and contain characteristic lipids, proteins and nucleic acids such as mRNA and microRNAs. They can signal through the binding and activation of membrane receptors or through the delivery of their cargo into the cytosol of target cells. Our preclinical data has shown that CDCs mediate most of their therapeutic activities through the secretion of extracellular vesicles.

Exosomes act as messengers to regulate the functions of neighboring or distant cells and have been shown to regulate functions such as cell survival, proliferation, inflammation and tissue regeneration. Furthermore, preclinical research has shown that exogenously-administered exosomes can modify cellular activities, thereby supporting their therapeutic potential. Their size, low or null immunogenicity and ability to communicate in native cellular language potentially makes them an exciting new class of therapeutic agents with the potential to expand our ability to address complex biological responses. Because exosomes are a cell-free substance, they can be stored, handled, reconstituted and administered in similar fashion to common biopharmaceutical products such as antibodies.

The following table summarizes our active product development programs:

Product	Indication/Population	Development Stage
CAP-1002	Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy*	HOPE-3 Phase III – in planning stages HOPE-2 Phase II completed***

		HOPE-Duchenne Phase I/II completed**

CAP-1002	SARS-CoV-2	INSPIRE Phase II enrolling
Exosome-mRNA vaccine	SARS-CoV-2	Preclinical

Engineered Exosomes (RNA delivery)	Monogenic Diseases	Discovery

CDC-Exosomes (CAP-2003)	Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy	IND submitted

Exosome-VLP vaccine	SARS-CoV-2	Preclinical

Engineered Exosomes (biologics delivery)	Evaluating	Discovery

* The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, has granted Orphan Drug, Regenerative Medicine Advanced Therapies, or RMAT, and Rare Pediatric Disease designations to CAP-1002 for the treatment of DMD.

**We completed an Open Label Extension, or OLE, for the usual care only comparator arm of the HOPE-Duchenne trial.

***We are currently conducting an OLE of the HOPE-2 trial.

Background on Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy

DMD is a rare form of muscular dystrophy which results in muscle degeneration and premature death. DMD affects approximately 1 in 3,600 male infants worldwide, and it is estimated that approximately 15,000 to 20,000 boys and young men are living with the disease in the United States. DMD results from the lack of functional dystrophin protein caused by a gene mutation. The lack of dystrophin, an important structural component of muscle cells, causes them to have increased susceptibility to damage and to progressively die. Additionally, the absence of dystrophin in muscle cells leads to significant cell damage and ultimately causes muscle cell death and fibrotic replacement. In DMD patients, heart muscle cells progressively die and are replaced with scar tissue. This cardiomyopathy eventually leads to heart failure, which is currently the leading cause of death among those with DMD.

Patients with DMD experience progressive muscle weakness and degeneration starting at an early age. Generally, a loss of ambulation occurs after the first decade of life and eventually the patients suffer respiratory and cardiac failure. Their lifespan is abbreviated and averages less than three decades. The annual cost of care for patients with DMD is very high and increases with disease progression. We therefore believe that DMD represents a significant market opportunity for our product candidate, CAP-1002.

CAP-1002 for the Treatment of Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy

Based on our understanding of the mechanism of action of CAP-1002 which has been seen in preclinical models of DMD, we believe that CAP-1002 has the potential to decrease inflammation and slow muscle degeneration while exerting positive effects on muscle regeneration, all of which may translate into patients retaining muscle function for a longer period of time. Data supporting peripheral intravenous route of administration of CAP-1002 in the DMD setting has been provided by preclinical mouse studies where CDCs, the active ingredient in CAP-1002, have been shown to increase exercise capacity and diaphragmatic function.

We are currently developing CAP-1002 for the treatment of DMD. We completed the positive HOPE-Duchenne Phase I/II trial in 2017 and then subsequently began the HOPE-2 Phase II trial in 2018. We reported positive interim 6-month results from HOPE-2 in 2019 and we reported final top-line 12-month results in May 2020. Our further plans with respect to the clinical development of CAP-1002 in DMD, including our decision to conduct a Phase III trial, will be based on the final guidance received from the FDA, our ability to secure funding necessary to conduct the trial should we decide to pursue that path, our ability to partner with another company to advance the development of CAP-1002 for DMD, and/or our ability to manufacture the product through a contract manufacturer, as well as other factors, some of which are not known at this time. Further, we have submitted a proposed Phase III protocol to the FDA. The size of the proposed Phase III trial is estimated to be approximately 60 patients and in our continuing discussions, FDA has indicated its acceptance of this potential study design.

Phase II HOPE-2 Clinical Trial

HOPE-2 is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial which was conducted at multiple sites located in the United States. We randomized 20 patients in our HOPE-2 clinical trial. Approximately 80% of the patients were non-ambulant and all patients were on a stable regimen of steroids. Demographic and baseline characteristics were similar between the two treatment groups. The clinical trial was designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of repeat, intravenous, or IV, doses of CAP-1002, in boys and young men with evidence of skeletal muscle impairment regardless of ambulatory status and who are on a stable regimen of systemic glucocorticoids.

While there are many clinical initiatives in DMD, HOPE-2 is one of the very few to focus on non-ambulant patients. These boys and young men are looking to maintain what function they have in their arms and hands, and Capricor’s previous study of a single intracoronary dose of CAP-1002 provided preliminary evidence of efficacy that CAP-1002 may be able to help DMD patients retain or slow the loss of upper limb function.

The primary efficacy endpoint of the HOPE-2 trial is the relative change in patients’ abilities to perform manual tasks that relate to activities of daily living and are important to their quality of life. These abilities were measured through the Performance of the Upper Limb, or PUL, test. In the HOPE-2 study we have evaluated these through both the PUL 1.2 and 2.0 versions. Although the PUL 1.2 version for the mid-level was the primary endpoint established for the trial, we also conducted an analysis using the PUL 2.0 version as the FDA suggested the use of the updated PUL 2.0 version as the primary efficacy endpoint in support of a Biologics License Application, or BLA. HOPE-2 assessed the mid-level dimension of the PUL which evaluates one’s ability to use muscles extending from the elbow to the hand, which muscles are essential for operating wheelchairs and performing other daily functions. In HOPE-2, additional secondary and exploratory endpoints such as cardiac function, pulmonary function, quality of life and additional measures were included.

In July 2019, we reported interim top-line results from a pre-specified interim analysis of 6-month data from the HOPE-2 trial, which showed meaningful results across several independent clinical measures.

In May 2020, we reported final top-line 12-month results. The data showed improvements in upper limb, cardiac and respiratory functions with p-values of less than p=0.05 in multiple measures. The 12-month data showed statistically meaningful improvements in the PUL 2.0 in CAP-1002 treated patients (p=0.05) with a mean change of 2.4 points over placebo patients. We also came very close to significance with the PUL 1.2 mid-level with all the data (p=0.08) with a mean change of 2.8 points over placebo patients. With the exception of steroids, preservation of function in DMD is uncommon. The placebo patients declined consistent with natural history, but in the treated group, most patients were stable or improved throughout the one-year treatment period.

The data also showed global improvements in cardiac function as measured by ejection fraction (p=0.004) and indexed volumes (LVESV, p=0.01, LVEDV p=0.07). These are surrogate measures of cardiac function and are considered significant in terms of relevance to long term outcomes. Additionally, there was also a reduction in the biomarker CK-MB, an enzyme that is only released when there is cardiac muscle cell damage. In normal human subjects, there is typically no CK-MB measurable in the blood. It is well accepted that continuous muscle cell damage in DMD leads to pathologically high enzyme levels associated with cardiac muscle cell loss. In HOPE-2 treatment with CAP-1002 was associated with a reduction in CK-MB levels as compared to placebo (p=0.006). This is the first ever study in DMD that correlates cardiac functional stabilization with reduction of a biomarker of cell damage.

Study Results

12-month Top-Line Efficacy Data:

	12-month Time-point
	CAP-1002 n=8		Placebo n=12		p-value
Upper Limb Function
Mid-level PUL (version 1.2)		-2.1 (3.63)		-4.9 (2.57)		p=0.08
Shoulder + Mid + Distal PUL (version 1.2)		-2.3 (3.86)		-6.4 (3.84)		p=0.03
Shoulder + Mid + Distal PUL (version 2.0)		-1.3 (2.14)		-3.7 (1.50)		p=0.05


Cardiac
LV Ejection Fraction %		-0.33 (2.01)		-1.89 (2.23)		p=0.004
LV End-Diastolic Volume, Indexed mL/m²		-7.35 (6.10)		0.00 (7.34)		p=0.07
LV End-Systolic Volume, Indexed mL/m²		-3.10 (1.68)		1.70 (5.02)		p=0.01
Creatine Kinase-MB (% of total CK)		-0.50 (0.55)		2.00 (1.00)		p=0.006

Mean Change from baseline to 12 months (standard deviation) shown.
ITT (intent to treat) population shown

P-values are nominal values unadjusted for multiple testing
Mixed model repeated measures analysis

Additionally, we are conducting an open-label extension available to all patients who participated in the HOPE-2 study which includes those patients who received placebo.

Safety

CAP-1002 was generally safe and well tolerated throughout the study. With the exception of hypersensitivity reactions which were mitigated with a common pre-medication regimen, no safety signals were identified in the HOPE-2 trial.

Regulatory Developments

In June 2017, we had a meeting with the FDA to discuss potential clinical endpoints that could be used for registration strategies for CAP-1002 in the DMD indication. The minutes of the meeting indicated the FDA's willingness to accept Capricor's proposal to use the PUL test as the basis for the primary efficacy endpoint for clinical studies in support of a BLA. The PUL test is an outcome instrument that was specifically designed to assess upper limb function in ambulant and non-ambulant patients with DMD.

In December 2018, we met with the FDA as part of the expedited review afforded under the RMAT designation. The agency stated that the trial would need to provide evidence of clinically meaningful changes in the PUL, as well as other evidence supportive of CAP-1002 efficacy for patients with advanced Duchenne muscular dystrophy, in order to potentially serve as a registration trial.

In October 2019, we had a meeting with the FDA to discuss, among other things, the results of the 6-month interim analysis of the HOPE-2 trial and our path forward with our DMD program. During the meeting, we proposed the possibility of accelerated approval. The FDA was not supportive of an accelerated approval pathway at that time and noted that the HOPE-2 trial was designed as an exploratory trial and that the 6-month data from the HOPE-2 trial did not provide substantial evidence of effectiveness to support a future BLA. The FDA did, however, indicate its support for conducting a Phase III trial of CAP-1002 for the treatment of DMD. In addition, the FDA reiterated that as part of our RMAT designation, they are willing to work with us to further the clinical development of the therapy.

In a follow-up to the October 2019 meeting, Capricor requested an additional meeting to clarify endpoints for future clinical trials. In a written response, FDA supported the use of the full PUL 2.0 from baseline to twelve months as a primary efficacy endpoint as long as clinical meaningfulness can be demonstrated. They suggested that a 1.0 point difference appears suitable to demonstrate product efficacy to support a BLA.

In a Type B meeting with the FDA in 2020, we focused on the 12-month results from the HOPE-2 trial and discussed next steps and a pathway to approval of a BLA for CAP-1002 in DMD. The FDA has continued to encourage us to conduct a Phase III study; at this time, however, we are still discussing the pathway forward for this program with the FDA and have not initiated a Phase III study.

Phase I/II HOPE-Duchenne Clinical Trial

We have completed the randomized, controlled, multi-center Phase I/II HOPE-Duchenne clinical trial which was designed to evaluate the safety and exploratory efficacy of CAP-1002 in patients with cardiomyopathy associated with Duchenne muscular dystrophy, or DMD. Twenty-five patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either CAP-1002 on top of usual care or usual care only. In patients receiving CAP-1002, 25 million cells were infused into each of their three main coronary arteries for a total dose of 75 million cells. It was a one-time treatment, and the last patient was infused in September 2016. Patients were observed over the course of 12 months. Efficacy was evaluated according to several exploratory outcome measures. This study was funded in part through a grant award from the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, or CIRM. In January 2019, this study was published in the online issue of Neurology, the medical journal of the American Academy of Neurology.

We reported our 12-month data from the HOPE-Duchenne trial at a Late-Breaking Science session of the American Heart Association Scientific Sessions 2017. As shoulder function had already been lost in most of the HOPE-Duchenne participants, investigators used the combined mid-distal PUL subscales to assess changes in skeletal muscle function and found significant improvement in those treated with CAP-1002 in a defined post-hoc analysis. Among the lower-functioning patients, defined as patients with a baseline mid-distal PUL score < 55 out of 58, investigators reported sustained or improved motor function at 12 months in 8 of 9 (89%) patients treated with CAP-1002 as compared to none (0%) of the usual care participants (p=0.007). Additionally, we reported significant improvements in systolic thickening of the left ventricular wall as well as reduction in scarring of the heart muscle among those treated with CAP-1002 decreased relative to the control group.

CAP-1002 was generally safe and well-tolerated in the HOPE-Duchenne trial. There was no significant difference in the incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events in either group. There were no early study discontinuations due to adverse events.

Regulatory Designations for CAP-1002 for the treatment of DMD

In April 2015, the FDA granted Orphan Drug Designation to CAP-1002 for the treatment of DMD. Orphan Drug Designation is granted by the FDA’s Office of Orphan Drug Products to drugs intended to treat a rare disease or condition affecting fewer than 200,000 people in the United States or a disease or condition that affects more than 200,000 people in the United States and for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available in the United States a drug for this type of disease or condition will be recovered from sales in the United States for that drug. This designation confers special incentives to the drug developer, including tax credits on the clinical development costs and prescription drug user fee waivers and may allow for a seven-year period of market exclusivity in the United States upon FDA approval.

In July 2017, the FDA granted Rare Pediatric Disease Designation to CAP-1002 for the treatment of DMD. The FDA defines a “rare pediatric disease” as a serious or life-threatening disease in which the serious or life-threatening manifestations primarily affect individuals aged from birth to 18 years and that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or a disease or condition that affects more than 200,000 people in the United States and for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available in the United States a drug for this type of disease or condition will be recovered from sales in the United States for that drug. Under the FDA's Rare Pediatric Disease Priority Review Voucher program, upon the approval of a qualifying New Drug Application, or NDA, or BLA for the treatment of a rare pediatric disease, the sponsor of such application would be eligible for a Rare Pediatric Disease Priority Review Voucher that can be used to obtain priority review for a subsequent NDA or BLA. The Priority Review Voucher may be sold or transferred an unlimited number of times.

In February 2018, we were notified by the FDA Office of Tissues and Advanced Therapies, that we were granted the Regenerative Medicine Advanced Therapy, or RMAT, designation for CAP-1002 for the treatment of DMD. The FDA grants the RMAT designation to regenerative medicine therapies intended to treat, modify, reverse, or cure a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and for which preliminary clinical evidence indicates a potential to address unmet medical needs for that condition. The RMAT designation makes therapies eligible for the same actions to expedite the development and review of a marketing application that are available to drugs that receive fast track or breakthrough therapy designation – including increased meeting opportunities, early interactions to discuss any potential surrogate or intermediate endpoints and the potential to support accelerated approval. CAP-1002 is one of the few therapies currently in development to help non-ambulant patients with DMD. To receive the RMAT designation, we submitted data from the HOPE-Duchenne Trial.

CAP-1002 for the Treatment of SARS-CoV-2

Within the framework of SARS-CoV-2 pathogenesis, multiple pathways known to be CAP-1002 sensitive may serve as therapeutic targets. These targets include pro-inflammatory pathways (TNF-α, interferon γ, IL-1, and IL-6) and anti-inflammatory pathways (regulatory T cells and IL-10) that have been explored with CAP-1002 in preclinical models of myocardial ischemia, myocarditis, heart failure, Duchenne muscular dystrophy and pulmonary hypertension. Given that CAP-1002 polarizes macrophages to an anti-inflammatory (healing) immunomodulatory phenotype, CAP-1002 may subsequently attenuate cytokine storm associated with SARS-CoV-2. Furthermore, as CAP-1002 directly targets cardiac dysfunction, CAP-1002 potentially may also be an important tool in the treatment of the cardiac complications of SARS-CoV-2. We are currently conducting the INSPIRE Phase II clinical trial in patients with a diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2.

CAP-1002 for the Treatment of Cardiac Conditions:

In previous years, we completed several trials investigating the use of CAP-1002 for the treatment of various cardiac conditions, including heart failure (the DYNAMIC Trial) and post myocardial infarction (MI) with cardiac dysfunction (the ALLSTAR trial). Because of our decision to focus our efforts on DMD, we have decided not to pursue those indications at this time, nor do we have any plans to continue with the development of these programs although we are continuing to evaluate certain cardiac measures in our HOPE-2 trial. We expect no further material expenses in connection with these programs.

CAP-1002 - Investigator Sponsored Clinical Trials:

Capricor has agreed to provide cells for investigational purposes in two clinical trials sponsored by CSMC. These cells were developed as part of the Company’s past research and development efforts. The first trial is known as “Regression of Fibrosis and Reversal of Diastolic Dysfunction in HFpEF Patients Treated with Allogeneic CDCs, or the REGRESS trial. Dr. Eduardo Marbán is the named principal investigator under the study. The second trial is known as “Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension treated with Cardiosphere-derived Allogeneic Stem Cells, or the ALPHA trial. In this trial, the investigational product is infused into the venous system via catheter into the right atrium. This trial is currently ongoing. In both studies, Capricor is providing the necessary number of doses of cells and will receive a negotiated amount of monetary compensation which was estimated to be approximately $2.1 million over several years. Due to the current COVID-19 pandemic, additional testing in each of the ALPHA and REGRESS trials has been delayed and as a result, purchases of additional doses of CAP-1002 have been delayed.

Exosomes Program

Our exosomes program consists of exosome-based vaccines, engineered exosomes and exosomes derived from CDCs (CAP-2003), all of which are in various stages of development. We have explored the use of our CDC-exosomes in preclinical studies of inflammation and intense immune activation such as DMD, sepsis, Graft versus-host disease (GVHD) and trauma. While CDC-exosomes are the initial technology we have used in preclinical development, we have expanded Capricor’s pipeline to include additional exosome technologies.

We are now focused on developing a precision-engineered exosome platform technology that has the ability to deliver defined sets of effector molecules which exert their effects through defined mechanisms of action. We have begun work on our planned expansion of our exosome platform technology that potentially may be used for vaccine development, vesicle mediated protein therapies and treatment of monogenic diseases.

In conjunction with these expansion efforts, we have entered into a Sponsored Research Agreement with JHU pursuant to which researchers in the lab of Dr. Stephen Gould will perform certain research activities in connection with our exosomes program and the further development of the platform.

Exosome-Based Vaccine Platform

We are now working on developing exosome-based vaccines for COVID-19. The exosome-based vaccine platform technology will aim to combine the improved protection that comes from immunizing individuals with multiple antigens in a manner that mimics the advantages of conventional virus vaccines, with the superior safety profile of virus-free vaccines. We are currently designing exosome-based vaccines to elicit strong humoral and cellular immune responses due to the simultaneous expression of antigens.

We are developing two exosome vaccine candidates. The first vaccine candidate is a tripartite exosome-mRNA vaccine which is designed to elicit a protective, long-lasting immune response to SARS-CoV-2 by targeting multiple structural proteins of the virus. Recently, in collaboration with researchers at JHU, we announced positive data from a preclinical study in mice using our exosome-based mRNA vaccine. The key findings of the data include the development of a safe exosome formulation capable of delivering functional mRNA in vitro and in vivo. Furthermore, the potential vaccine induced both antibody responses and cellular immunity to multiple proteins of SARS-CoV-2.

We recently met with the FDA in a pre-IND meeting and are planning on filing an IND by the third quarter of 2021, subject to regulatory approval, for this vaccine for SARS-CoV-2.

The second candidate is an exosomal antigen vaccine which is a vesicle-based, nucleic acid-free formulation carrying multiple structural proteins of SARS-CoV-2. We continue to assess this technology for potential uses within infectious diseases and potentially other uses.

Furthermore, we recently entered into a non-exclusive license to intellectual property, know-how and data with JHU related to a new imaging-based serology test platform for COVID-19. This platform, which is amenable to a vast array of serology applications, has been applied to the analysis of patient antibodies to multiple SARS-CoV-2 proteins, including spike, nucleocapsid, and membrane. The development of this companion diagnostic allows us to accurately evaluate the effects of our vaccines and therapeutics and we intend to explore the potential for partnership opportunities for this technology.

Engineered Exosomes Platform

Building upon the natural ability of exosomes for intercellular communication, we are focused on engineering exosomes to load them with different macromolecules. We are actively developing an engineered exosomes platform for the delivery of nucleic acids (including mRNA) for a variety of different diseases. In collaboration with researchers at JHU, we recently published data demonstrating exosome-mediated delivery of mRNAs with enhanced expression and lower toxicity compared to lipid nanoparticles. Additionally, we showed functional enzyme expression and real-time imaging of mRNA expression in live animals. Building on this platform, we have promising data for enhanced targeting of exosomes. Our plan is to actively develop this platform for a broad spectrum of diseases.

CDC-Exosomes (CAP-2003)

We have promising preclinical data in several indications from studies done in our labs as well as in collaboration with other companies and academic institutions. Additionally, in July 2018, we entered into a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement with the USAISR pursuant to which we agreed to cooperate in research and development on the evaluation of our CDC-Exosomes for the treatment of trauma related injuries and conditions which are one of the leading causes of death in the U.S.

These programs represent our core technology and products.

Intellectual Property and Proprietary Know-How

Our goal is to obtain, maintain and enforce patent rights for our products, formulations, processes, methods of use and other proprietary technologies, preserve our trade secrets, and operate without infringing on the proprietary rights of other parties, both in the United States and abroad. Our policy is to actively seek to obtain, where appropriate, the broadest intellectual property protection possible for our current product candidates and any future product candidates, proprietary information and proprietary technology through a combination of contractual arrangements and patents, both in the United States and abroad. Even patent protection, however, may not always afford us with complete protection against competitors who seek to circumvent our patents. If we fail to adequately protect or enforce our intellectual property rights or secure rights to patents of others, the value of our intellectual property rights would diminish. To this end, we require all of our employees, consultants, advisors and other contractors to enter into confidentiality agreements that prohibit the disclosure and use of confidential information and, where applicable, require disclosure and assignment to us of the ideas, developments, discoveries and inventions relevant to our technologies and important to our business.

The development of complex biotechnology products such as ours typically includes the early discovery of a technology platform – often in an academic institution – followed by increasingly focused development around a product opportunity, including identification and definition of a specific product candidate and development of scalable manufacturing processes, formulations, delivery and dosage regimens. As a result, biotechnology products are often protected by several families of patent filings that are made at different times in the development cycle and cover different aspects of the product. Earlier filed broad patent applications directed to the discovery of the platform technology thus usually expire ahead of patents covering later developments such as scalable manufacturing processes and dosing regimens. Patent expirations on products may therefore span several years and vary from country to country based on the scope of available coverage. Our patents, or patent applications, if issued and upon payment of patent maintenance fees, would expire as early as 2024 and as late as 2041. There are also limited opportunities to obtain extensions of patent terms in certain countries.

Capricor’s Technology - CAP-1002 and Exosomes

Capricor has entered into exclusive license agreements for intellectual property rights related to certain cardiac-derived cells with Università Degli Studi Di Roma La Sapienza, or the University of Rome, JHU and CSMC. Capricor has also entered into an exclusive license agreement for intellectual property rights related to exosomes with CSMC and a non-exclusive license agreement with JHU related to the imaging-based serology technology for COVID-19. In addition, Capricor has filed patent applications related to the technology developed by its own scientists.

University of Rome License Agreement

Capricor and the University of Rome entered into a License Agreement, dated June 21, 2006, or the Rome License Agreement, which provides for the grant of an exclusive, world-wide, royalty-bearing license by the University of Rome to Capricor (with the right to sublicense) to develop and commercialize licensed products under the licensed patent rights in all fields. Capricor has a right of first negotiation, for a certain period of time, to obtain a license to any new and separate patent applications owned by the University of Rome utilizing cardiac stem cells in cardiac care.

Pursuant to the Rome License Agreement, Capricor paid the University of Rome a license issue fee, is currently paying minimum annual royalties in the amount of 20,000 Euros per year, and is obligated to pay a lower-end of a mid-range double-digit percentage on all royalties received as a result of sublicenses granted, which are net of any royalties paid to third parties under a license agreement from such third party to Capricor. The minimum annual royalties are creditable against future royalty payments.

The Rome License Agreement will, unless extended or sooner terminated, remain in effect until the later of the last claim of any patent or until any patent application comprising licensed patent rights has expired or been abandoned. Under the terms of the Rome License Agreement, either party may terminate the agreement should the other party become insolvent or file a petition in bankruptcy. Either party may terminate the agreement upon the other party’s material breach, provided that the breaching party will have up to 90 days to cure its material breach. Capricor may also terminate for any reason upon 90 days’ written notice to the University of Rome.

The Johns Hopkins University License Agreements

License Agreement for CDCs

Capricor and JHU entered into an Exclusive License Agreement, effective June 22, 2006, or the JHU License Agreement, which provides for the grant of an exclusive, world-wide, royalty-bearing license by JHU to Capricor (with the right to sublicense) to develop and commercialize licensed products and licensed services under the licensed patent rights in all fields and a nonexclusive right to the know-how. In May 2009, the JHU License Agreement was amended to add additional patent rights to the JHU License Agreement in consideration of a payment to JHU and reimbursement of patent costs. Capricor and JHU executed a Second Amendment to the JHU License Agreement, effective as of December 20, 2013, pursuant to which, among other things, certain definitions were added or amended, the timing of certain obligations was revised and other obligations of the parties were clarified. Under the JHU License Agreement, Capricor is required to exercise commercially reasonable and diligent efforts to develop and commercialize licensed products covered by the licenses from JHU.

Pursuant to the JHU License Agreement, JHU was paid an initial license fee and, thereafter, Capricor is required to pay minimum annual royalties on the anniversary dates of the JHU License Agreement. The minimum annual royalties are creditable against a low single-digit running royalty on net sales of products and net service revenues, which Capricor is also required to pay under the JHU License Agreement, which running royalty may be subject to further reduction in the event that Capricor is required to pay royalties on any patent rights to third parties in order to make or sell a licensed product. In addition, Capricor is required to pay a low double-digit percentage of the consideration received by it from sublicenses granted, and is required to pay JHU certain defined development milestone payments upon the successful completion of certain phases of its clinical studies and upon receiving approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or the FDA. The development milestones range from $100,000 upon successful completion of a full Phase I clinical study to $1,000,000 upon full FDA market approval and are fully creditable against payments owed by Capricor to JHU on account of sublicense consideration attributable to milestone payments received from a sublicensee. The maximum aggregate amount of milestone payments payable under the JHU License Agreement, as amended, is $1,850,000. In May 2015, Capricor paid the development milestone related to Phase I that was owed to JHU pursuant to the terms of the JHU License Agreement. The next milestone is triggered upon successful completion of a full Phase II study for which a payment of $250,000 will be due. At this time, it is uncertain as to whether the $250,000 milestone payment will become due.

The JHU License Agreement will, unless sooner terminated, continue in effect in each applicable country until the date of expiration of the last to expire patent within the patent rights, or, if no patents are issued, then for twenty years from the effective date. Under the terms of the JHU License Agreement, either party may terminate the agreement should the other party become insolvent or file a petition in bankruptcy, or fail to cure a material breach within 30 days after notice. In addition, Capricor may terminate for any reason upon 60 days’ written notice.

License Agreement for Serology Diagnostic

Capricor and JHU entered into a Nonexclusive License Agreement, effective January 6, 2021, or the JHU Serology License Agreement, which provides for the grant of a non-exclusive, world-wide, non-royalty-bearing license by JHU to Capricor to develop and commercialize licensed products under the licensed patent rights for COVID-19.

Cedars-Sinai Medical Center License Agreements

License Agreement for CDCs

On January 4, 2010, Capricor entered into an Exclusive License Agreement with CSMC, or the Original CSMC License Agreement, for certain intellectual property related to its CDC technology. In 2013, the Original CSMC License Agreement was amended twice resulting in, among other things, a reduction in the percentage of sublicense fees which would have been payable to CSMC. Effective December 30, 2013, Capricor entered into an Amended and Restated Exclusive License Agreement with CSMC, or the Amended CSMC License Agreement, which amended, restated, and superseded the Original CSMC License Agreement, pursuant to which, among other things, certain definitions were added or amended, the timing of certain obligations was revised and other obligations of the parties were clarified.

The Amended CSMC License Agreement provides for the grant of an exclusive, world-wide, royalty-bearing license by CSMC to Capricor (with the right to sublicense) to conduct research using the patent rights and know-how and develop and commercialize products in the field using the patent rights and know-how. In addition, Capricor has the exclusive right to negotiate for an exclusive license to any future rights arising from related work conducted by or under the direction of Dr. Eduardo Marbán on behalf of CSMC. In the event the parties fail to agree upon the terms of an exclusive license for any future rights, Capricor will have a non-exclusive license to such future rights, subject to royalty obligations.

Pursuant to the Original CSMC License Agreement, CSMC was paid a license fee and Capricor was obligated to reimburse CSMC for certain fees and costs incurred in connection with the prosecution of certain patent rights. Additionally, Capricor is required to meet certain spending and development milestones.

Pursuant to the Amended CSMC License Agreement, Capricor remains obligated to pay low single-digit royalties on sales of royalty-bearing products as well as a low double-digit percentage of the consideration received from any sublicenses or other grant of rights. The above-mentioned royalties are subject to reduction in the event Capricor becomes obligated to obtain a license from a third party for patent rights in connection with the royalty-bearing product. In 2010, Capricor discontinued its research under some of the patents.

The Amended CSMC License Agreement will, unless sooner terminated, continue in effect on a country by country basis until the last to expire of the patents covering the patent rights or future patent rights. Under the terms of the Amended CSMC License Agreement, unless waived by CSMC, the agreement shall automatically terminate: (i) if Capricor ceases, dissolves or winds up its business operations; (ii) in the event of the insolvency or bankruptcy of Capricor or if Capricor makes an assignment for the benefit of its creditors; (iii) if performance by either party jeopardizes the licensure, accreditation or tax exempt status of CSMC or the agreement is deemed illegal by a governmental body; (iv) within 30 days for non-payment of royalties; (v) after 90 days’ notice from CSMC if Capricor fails to undertake commercially reasonable efforts to exploit the patent rights or future patent rights; (vi) if a material breach has not been cured within 90 days; or (vii) if Capricor challenges any of the CSMC patent rights. If Capricor fails to undertake commercially reasonable efforts to exploit the patent rights or future patent rights, and fails to cure that breach after 90 days’ notice from CSMC, instead of terminating the license, CSMC has the option to convert any exclusive license to Capricor to a non-exclusive or co-exclusive license. Capricor may terminate the agreement if CSMC fails to cure any material breach within 90 days after notice.

On March 20, 2015, August 5, 2016, December 26, 2017, and June 20, 2018, Capricor and CSMC entered into a number of amendments to the Amended CSMC License Agreement, pursuant to which the parties agreed to add and delete certain patent applications from the list of scheduled patents. Capricor reimbursed CSMC for certain attorneys’ fees and filing fees incurred in connection with the additional patent applications.

License Agreement for Exosomes

On May 5, 2014, Capricor entered into an Exclusive License Agreement with CSMC, or the Exosomes License Agreement, for certain intellectual property rights related to exosomes technology. The Exosomes License Agreement provides for the grant of an exclusive, world-wide, royalty-bearing license by CSMC to Capricor (with the right to sublicense) in order to conduct research using the patent rights and know-how and to develop and commercialize products in the field using the patent rights and know-how. In addition, Capricor has the exclusive right to negotiate for an exclusive license to any future rights arising from related work conducted by or under the direction of Dr. Eduardo Marbán on behalf of CSMC. In the event the parties fail to agree upon the terms of an exclusive license, Capricor shall have a non-exclusive license to such future rights, subject to royalty obligations.

Pursuant to the Exosomes License Agreement, CSMC was paid a license fee and Capricor reimbursed CSMC for certain fees and costs incurred in connection with the preparation and prosecution of certain patent applications. Additionally, Capricor is required to meet certain non-monetary development milestones and is obligated to pay low single-digit royalties on sales of royalty-bearing products as well as a single-digit percentage of the consideration received from any sublicenses or other grant of rights. The above-mentioned royalties are subject to reduction in the event Capricor becomes obligated to obtain a license from a third party for patent rights in connection with the royalty bearing product.

The Exosomes License Agreement will, unless sooner terminated, continue in effect on a country by country basis until the last to expire of the patents covering the patent rights or future patent rights. Under the terms of the Exosomes License Agreement, unless waived by CSMC, the agreement shall automatically terminate: (i) if Capricor ceases, dissolves or winds up its business operations; (ii) in the event of the insolvency or bankruptcy of Capricor or if Capricor makes an assignment for the benefit of its creditors; (iii) if performance by either party jeopardizes the licensure, accreditation or tax exempt status of CSMC or the agreement is deemed illegal by a governmental body; (iv) within 30 days for non-payment of royalties; (v) after 90 days if Capricor fails to undertake commercially reasonable efforts to exploit the patent rights or future patent rights; (vi) if a material breach has not been cured within 90 days; or (vii) if Capricor challenges any of the CSMC patent rights. If Capricor fails to undertake commercially reasonable efforts to exploit the patent rights or future patent rights, and fails to cure that breach after 90 days’ notice from CSMC, instead of terminating the license, CSMC has the option to convert any exclusive license to Capricor to a non-exclusive or co-exclusive license. Capricor may terminate the agreement if CSMC fails to cure any material breach within 90 days after notice.

On February 27, 2015, June 10, 2015, August 5, 2016, December 26, 2017, June 20, 2018, September 25, 2018, August 19, 2020, and August 28, 2020 Capricor and CSMC entered into a number of amendments to the Exosomes License Agreement. These amendments added additional patent applications and patent families to the Exosomes License Agreement, added certain defined product development milestone payments, modified certain milestone deadlines, and added certain performance milestones with respect to product candidates covered by certain future patent rights in order to maintain an exclusive license to those future patent rights; failure to meet those milestones would cause CSMC to have the right to convert the license from exclusive to non-exclusive or co-exclusive, or to terminate the license, subject to Capricor’s right to license such patent rights for internal research purposes on a non-exclusive basis. These amendments also obligated Capricor to reimburse CSMC for certain attorneys’ fees and filing fees in connection with the additional patent applications and patent families.

Sponsored Research Agreement with Johns Hopkins University

On April 1, 2020 we entered into a Sponsored Research Agreement, or the SRA, with JHU pursuant to which researchers in the lab of Dr. Stephen Gould will perform certain research activities in connection with our exosomes program. Pursuant to the SRA, we have agreed to fund certain research activities and will have the right to negotiate for exclusive or non-exclusive rights to intellectual property that may result from such research activities.

Manufacturing

Capricor presently maintains its laboratory, research and manufacturing facilities in leased premises located at CSMC, or the Facilities Lease. In that portion of the leased premises where we manufacture CAP-1002 and plan to manufacture our exosome products, including our exosome-mRNA vaccine for potential clinical use, we believe that we follow good manufacturing practices to the extent that they are applicable to our clinical programs, but our premises are not approved as a current Good Manufacturing Practices, or cGMP, facility, for the manufacture of commercial product. Capricor manufactured CAP-1002 in this facility for our previous studies.

In addition to manufacturing CAP-1002 and our exosome technologies for its own clinical trials, Capricor has agreed to provide CAP-1002 for investigational purposes in two clinical trials sponsored by CSMC. If we are unable to extend the term of our Facilities Lease, Capricor would have to secure alternative facilities in which to manufacture its products, which would involve a significant monetary investment and would negatively impact the progress of our planned clinical trials and regulatory approvals. In addition, we would have to establish a collaboration agreement with a third party or build out our own manufacturing facility for any commercial scale manufacturing of our exosome products.

We have initiated a technology transfer with Lonza Houston, Inc., a leading global contract manufacturing organization to prepare for commercial or possibly for late-stage clinical manufacturing of CAP-1002. The current activities are focused on process development services for the manufacturing processes and related other activities necessary for potential cGMP readiness.

Manufacturing Process for CAP-1002

The manufacturing process for CAP-1002 begins with material from an entire heart received from a donor that was collected from an organ procurement organization, or OPO. This tissue is then taken to the lab where the cells are isolated, expanded, and processed through a series of proprietary unit operations. After expanding, processing, release testing and quality review, the CAP-1002 product becomes available for administration to patients participating in clinical trials. CAP-1002 is cryo-preserved, enabling us to produce large lots that can be frozen and then administered to patients as needed.

Manufacturing Process for CDC-Exosomes (CAP-2003)

The process for manufacturing CAP-2003 starts with the proprietary process of creating a cell bank from donor heart tissue through the expansion of CDCs. Afterwards, exosomes are isolated from the expanded CDCs. After these exosomes are prepared, formulated, filled, tested, and validated, the exosomes product becomes available for clinical investigation. We believe that the allogeneic, acellular nature of exosomes would potentially enable us to create a scalable cell-derived product.

Manufacturing Processes for Other Exosome Technologies

We have also made significant progress planning the next steps for the manufacturing process for our exosome product candidates, including our exosome-mRNA vaccine. We believe these developments will enable us to scale up our manufacturing capabilities and allow us to manufacture enough material for early-stage clinical development. We are exploring the use of various cell sources to generate our exosomes for preclinical and potential clinical use.

Research and Development

Capricor’s research and development program has been advanced in part through federal and state grants and loan awards totaling approximately $28 million to date. Our ongoing research and development activities primarily concern CDCs and exosomes, and are focused on the characterization of their composition and actions, the evaluation of their therapeutic potential in selected disease settings, the development of next generation product candidates, and the identification of new technologies and indications.

Competition

We are engaged in fields that are characterized by extensive worldwide research and competition by pharmaceutical companies, medical device companies, specialized biotechnology companies, hospitals, physicians and academic institutions, both in the United States and abroad. This competition is particularly intense and advanced with respect to the development of vaccines for SARS-CoV-2. The pharmaceutical industry is highly competitive, with a number of established, large pharmaceutical companies, as well as many smaller companies. Many of the organizations competing with us have substantially greater financial resources, larger research and development staffs and facilities, longer drug development history in obtaining regulatory approvals, and greater manufacturing and marketing capabilities than we do. There are many pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies, public and private universities, government agencies, and research organizations actively engaged in research and development of products which may target the same indications as our product candidates. We expect any future products and product candidates we develop to compete on the basis of, among other things, product efficacy and safety, time to market, price, extent of adverse side effects, and convenience of treatment procedures. The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are subject to rapid and significant technological change. The drugs that we are attempting to develop will have to compete with existing and future therapies. Our future success will depend in part on our ability to maintain a competitive position with respect to evolving cell therapy and exosome technologies. There can be no assurance that existing or future therapies developed by others will not render our potential products obsolete or noncompetitive. In addition, companies pursuing different but related fields represent substantial competition. These organizations also compete with us to attract patients for clinical trials, qualified personnel and parties for acquisitions, joint ventures, or other collaborations.

Government Regulation

The research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, approval, labeling, packaging, storage, recordkeeping, serialization and tracking, promotion, advertising, distribution and marketing, post-approval monitoring and reporting, and export and import, among other things, of our product candidates are extensively regulated by governmental authorities in the United States and other countries. In the United States, the FDA regulates drugs under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or the FDCA, and its implementing regulations. Failure to comply with the applicable U.S. requirements may subject us to administrative or judicial sanctions, such as the FDA’s refusal to approve a pending NDA or a pending BLA, warning letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions and/or criminal prosecution.

FDA Approval Process for Drugs and Biologics

Pharmaceutical products, including biological products such as ours may not be commercially marketed without prior approval from the FDA and comparable regulatory agencies in other countries. In the United States, the process for receiving such approval is long, expensive and risky, and includes the following steps:

	·	preclinical laboratory tests, animal studies, and formulation studies;
	·	submission to the FDA of an IND for human clinical testing, which must become effective before human clinical trials may begin;
	·	approval by an IRB at each clinical site before each trial may be initiated;
	·	adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials to establish the safety and efficacy of the drug for each indication;

	·	submission to the FDA of an NDA, for a drug, or BLA, for a biological product;
	·	satisfactory completion of an FDA advisory committee review, if applicable;
	·	satisfactory completion of an FDA inspection of the manufacturing facility or facilities at which the drug is produced to assess compliance with cGMP;
	·	a potential FDA audit of the preclinical and clinical trial sites that generated the data in support of the NDA or BLA;
	·	the ability to obtain clearance or approval of companion diagnostic tests, if required, on a timely basis, or at all;
	·	FDA review and approval of the NDA or BLA prior to any commercial marketing or sale of the drug in the United States; and
	·	compliance with any post-approval requirements, including the potential requirement to implement a REMS, and the potential requirement to conduct post-approval studies.

Sponsors submit NDAs in order to obtain marketing approval for drugs. Sponsors submit BLAs in order to obtain marketing approval for biologics, which include, among other product classes, vaccines.

Regulation by U.S. and foreign governmental authorities is a significant factor affecting our ability to commercialize any of our products, as well as the timing of such commercialization and our ongoing research and development activities. The commercialization of drug products requires regulatory approval by governmental agencies prior to commercialization. Various laws and regulations govern or influence the research and development, non-clinical and clinical testing, manufacturing, processing, packaging, validation, safety, labeling, storage, record keeping, registration, listing, distribution, advertising, sale, marketing and post-marketing commitments of our products. The lengthy process of seeking these approvals, and the subsequent compliance with applicable laws and regulations, require expending substantial resources.

The results of preclinical testing, which include laboratory evaluation of product chemistry, formulation, toxicity and carcinogenicity animal studies to assess the potential safety and efficacy of the product and its formulations, details concerning the drug manufacturing process and its controls, and a proposed clinical trial protocol and other information must be submitted to the FDA as part of an IND that must be reviewed and become effective before clinical testing can begin. The study protocol and informed consent information for patients in clinical trials must also be submitted to an independent Institutional Review Board, or IRB, for approval covering each institution at which the clinical trial will be conducted. Once a sponsor submits an IND, the sponsor must wait 30 calendar days before initiating any clinical trials. If the FDA has comments or questions within this 30-day period, the issue(s) must be resolved to the satisfaction of the FDA before a clinical trial can begin. In addition, the FDA or IRB may impose a clinical hold on ongoing clinical trials if, among other things, it believes that a clinical trial either is not being conducted in accordance with FDA requirements or presents an unacceptable and significant risk to clinical trial patients. If the FDA imposes a clinical hold, clinical trials can only proceed under terms authorized by the FDA. If applicable, our preclinical and clinical studies must conform to the FDA’s Good Laboratory Practice, or GLP, and Good Clinical Practice, or GCP, requirements, respectively, which are designed to ensure the quality and integrity of submitted data and protect the rights and well-being of study patients. Information for certain clinical trials also must be publicly disclosed within certain time limits on the clinical trial registry and results databank maintained by the NIH.

Typically, clinical testing involves a three-phase process; however, the phases may overlap or be combined:

	·	Phase I clinical trials typically are conducted in a small number of volunteers or patients to assess the early tolerability and safety profile, the pattern of drug absorption, distribution and metabolism, the mechanism of action in humans, and may include studies where investigational drugs are used as research to explore biological phenomena or disease processes;
	·	Phase II clinical trials typically are conducted in a limited patient population with a specific disease in order to assess appropriate dosages and dose regimens, expand evidence of the safety profile and evaluate preliminary efficacy; and
	·	Phase III clinical trials typically are larger scale, multicenter, well-controlled trials conducted on patients with a specific disease to generate enough data to statistically evaluate the efficacy and safety of the product, to establish the overall benefit-risk relationship of the drug and to provide adequate information for the labeling of the drug.

A therapeutic product candidate being studied in clinical trials may be made available for treatment of individual patients, intermediate-size patient populations, or for widespread treatment use under an expanded access protocol, under certain circumstances. Pursuant to the 21st Century Cures Act (Cures Act), which was signed into law in December 2016, the manufacturer of one or more investigational products for the diagnosis, monitoring, or treatment of one or more serious diseases or conditions is required to make available, such as by posting on its website, its policy on evaluating and responding to requests for individual patient access to such investigational product.

Additionally, on May 30, 2018, the Trickett Wendler, Frank Mongiello, Jordan McLinn, and Matthew Bellina Right to Try Act of 2017 was signed into law. The law, among other things, provides a federal framework for certain patients to access certain investigational new drug products that have completed a Phase 1 clinical trial and that are undergoing investigation for FDA approval. Under certain circumstances, eligible patients can seek treatment without enrolling in clinical trials and without obtaining FDA authorization under an FDA expanded access program; however, manufacturers are not obligated to provide investigational new drug products under the current federal right to try law.

The results of the preclinical and clinical testing, chemistry, manufacturing and control information, proposed labeling and other information are then submitted to the FDA in the form of either an NDA or BLA for review and potential approval to begin commercial sales. In responding to an NDA or BLA, the FDA may grant marketing approval, or issue a Complete Response Letter, or CRL. A CRL generally contains a statement of specific conditions that must be met in order to secure final approval of an NDA or BLA and may require substantial additional testing or information. If and when those conditions have been met to the FDA’s satisfaction, the FDA will typically issue an approval letter, which authorizes commercial marketing of the product with specific prescribing information for specific indications, and sometimes with specified post-marketing commitments and/or distribution and use restrictions imposed under a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy program. Any approval required from the FDA might not be obtained on a timely basis, if at all.

Disclosure of Clinical Trial Information

Sponsors of certain clinical trials of FDA-regulated products are required to register and disclose certain clinical trial information. Information related to the product, patient population, phase of investigation, trial sites and investigators, and other aspects of the clinical trial are then made public as part of the registration. Sponsors are also obligated to disclose the results of their clinical trials after completion. Disclosure of the results of these trials can be delayed in certain circumstances for up to two years after the date of completion of the trial. Competitors may use this publicly available information to gain knowledge regarding the progress of development programs.

Orphan Drugs

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan drug designation to therapeutic candidates intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the U.S. or more than 200,000 individuals in the U.S. and for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available in the U.S. a therapeutic candidate for this type of disease or condition will be recovered from sales in the U.S. for that therapeutic candidate. Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting a marketing application for the therapeutic candidate for that particular disease or condition. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in or shorten the duration of the regulatory review and approval process. Among the other benefits of orphan drug designation are tax credits for certain research and an exemption from the NDA or BLA application fee. The FDA may revoke orphan drug designation, and if it does, it will publicize that the drug is no longer designated as an orphan drug.

If a therapeutic candidate with orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for such drug for the disease for which it has such designation, the therapeutic candidate is entitled to orphan product exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications to market the same therapeutic candidate for the same indication, for seven years, unless the sponsor of the subsequent application demonstrates clinical superiority, in the form of a greater efficacy, greater safety, or a major contribution to patient care. Orphan drug exclusivity, however, could also block the approval of one of our therapeutic candidates for seven years if a competitor obtains orphan drug designation and FDA approval of the same therapeutic candidate for the same condition or disease as our orphan-designated drug. For macromolecules, FDA considers a drug to be the same drug as an orphan-designated macromolecule if it contains the same principal molecular structural features, but not necessarily all of the same structural features.

In addition, as the FDA has interpreted the Orphan Drug Act, even if a previously approved same drug does not have unexpired orphan exclusivity, a demonstration of clinical superiority is required for a subsequent marketing application for the same orphan-designated drug for the same disease or condition to be awarded a 7-year period of orphan exclusivity upon marketing approval. In recent years, there have been multiple legal challenges to this FDA interpretation, and in August 2017, Congress amended the orphan drug provisions of the FDCA through enactment of the FDA Reauthorization Act of 2017 to codify FDA’s longstanding interpretation. Section 527 of the FDCA now expressly provides that if a sponsor of an orphan-designated drug that is otherwise the same as an already approved drug for the same rare disease or condition is seeking orphan exclusivity, FDA shall require such sponsor to demonstrate that such drug is clinically superior to any already approved or licensed drug that is the same drug in order to obtain orphan drug exclusivity. Orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent the FDA from approving a different drug for the same disease or condition, or the same drug for a different disease or condition.

Expedited Development and Review Programs

The FDA has a Fast Track program that is intended to expedite or facilitate the process for reviewing new drugs and biological products that meet certain criteria. Specifically, new drugs and biological products are eligible for Fast Track designation if they are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for the condition. Fast Track designation applies to the combination of the product and the specific indication for which it is being studied. The sponsor of a new drug or biologic may request the FDA to designate the drug or biologic as a Fast Track product at any time during the clinical development of the product. Unique to a Fast Track product, the FDA may consider for review sections of the marketing application on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted, if the sponsor provides a schedule for the submission of the sections of the application, the FDA agrees to accept sections of the application and determines that the schedule is acceptable, and the sponsor pays any required user fees upon submission of the first section of the application FDA may revoke the Fast Track designation if it believes that the designation is no longer supported by data emerging in the clinical trial process.

Products may also be eligible for other types of FDA programs intended to expedite development and review, such as Breakthrough Therapy designation, priority review and accelerated approval. Under the Breakthrough Therapy program, products intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition may be eligible for the benefits of the Fast Track program when preliminary clinical evidence demonstrates that such product may have substantial improvement on one or more clinically significant endpoints over existing therapies. Additionally, FDA will seek to ensure the sponsor of a breakthrough therapy product receives timely advice and interactive communications to help the sponsor design and conduct a development program as efficiently as possible.

A product is eligible for priority review if it is intended to treat a serious condition and, if approved, it would provide a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness. FDA intends to take action on a priority review marketing application within 6 months of receipt, compared to 10 months of receipt for regular review submissions.

Additionally, a product may be eligible for accelerated approval if it is intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and would provide meaningful therapeutic benefit over existing treatments. Eligible products may receive accelerated approval on the basis of adequate and well-controlled clinical studies establishing that the product has an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict a clinical benefit, or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality and is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity, mortality, or other clinical benefit. As a condition of approval, the FDA may require that a sponsor of a drug or biological product receiving accelerated approval diligently perform adequate and well-controlled post-marketing clinical studies demonstrating clinical benefit. In addition, the FDA requires as a condition for accelerated approval the submission of promotional materials, which could adversely impact the timing of the commercial launch of the product. Fast Track designation, Breakthrough Therapy designation, priority review and accelerated approval do not change the standards for full approval but may expedite the development or approval process.

Regenerative Medicine Advanced Therapies (RMAT) Designation

The FDA has established a Regenerative Medicine Advanced Therapy (RMAT) designation as part of its implementation of the 21st Century Cures Act, or Cures Act. The RMAT designation program is intended to fulfill the Cures Act requirement that the FDA facilitate an efficient development program for, and expedite review of, any drug that meets the following criteria: (1) it qualifies as a RMAT, which is defined as a cell therapy, therapeutic tissue engineering product, human cell and tissue product, or any combination product using such therapies or products, with limited exceptions; (2) it is intended to treat, modify, reverse, or cure a serious or life-threatening disease or condition; and (3) preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug has the potential to address unmet medical needs for such a disease or condition. Like breakthrough therapy designation, RMAT designation provides potential benefits that include more frequent meetings with FDA to discuss the development plan for the product candidate, and eligibility for rolling review and priority review. Products granted RMAT designation may also be eligible for accelerated approval on the basis of a surrogate or intermediate endpoint reasonably likely to predict long-term clinical benefit, or reliance upon data obtained from a meaningful number of sites, including through expansion to additional sites. RMAT-designated products that receive accelerated approval may, as appropriate, fulfill their post-approval requirements through the submission of clinical evidence, clinical studies, patient registries, or other sources of real-world evidence (such as electronic health records); through the collection of larger confirmatory data sets; or via post-approval monitoring of all patients treated with such therapy prior to approval of the therapy.

Rare Pediatric Disease Priority Review Voucher

The FDA generally defines a “rare pediatric disease” as a serious or life-threatening disease that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the U.S. primarily under the age of 18 years old. Under the FDA's Rare Pediatric Disease Priority Review Voucher (PRV) program, upon the approval of an application for a product for the treatment of a rare pediatric disease, the sponsor of such application is eligible for a Rare Pediatric Disease Priority Review Voucher. Currently, the Priority Review Voucher can be used to obtain priority review for any subsequent application and may be sold or transferred an unlimited number of times. Under the Cures Act, Congress extended the PRV program for rare pediatric diseases through 2020. A drug designated as a drug for a rare pediatric disease by December 18, 2020, and approved by December 18, 2022, may receive a voucher.

FDA Emergency Use Authorization

Section 564 of the FDCA allows the FDA to authorize the shipment of drugs, biological products (including vaccines), or medical devices that either lack required approval, licensure, or clearance (unapproved products), or are approved but are to be used for unapproved ways to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious diseases or conditions in the event of an emergency declaration by the HHS Secretary.

On February 4, 2020, HHS Secretary Alex M. Azar II declared a public health emergency for COVID-19, under 21 U.S.C. § 360bbb-3(b)(1), justifying the authorization of emergency use of IVDs for detection and/or diagnosis of COVID-19. This determination was published in the Federal Register on February 7, 2020.

While this emergency declaration is effective, the FDA may authorize the use of an unapproved product or an unapproved use of an approved product if it concludes that:

	·	an agent referred to in the emergency declaration could cause a serious or life-threatening disease or condition;
	·	it is reasonable to believe that the authorized product may be effective in diagnosing, treating, or preventing that disease or condition or a serious or life-threatening disease or condition caused by an approved product or a product marketed under an EUA;
	·	the known and potential benefits of the authorized product, when used for that disease or condition, outweigh known and potential risks, taking into consideration the material threat of agents identified in the emergency declaration;
	·	there is no adequate, approved, and available alternative to the authorized product for diagnosing, preventing, or treating the relevant disease or condition; or
	·	any other criteria prescribed by the FDA is satisfied.

To date, FDA has submitted all EUAs it has received for vaccine candidates to treat COVID-19 for advisory committee review prior to issuing an EUA.

Medical products that are granted an EUA are only permitted to commercialize their products under the terms and conditions provided in the authorization. The FDCA authorizes FDA to impose such conditions on an EUA as may be necessary to protect the public health. Consequently, postmarketing requirements will vary across EUAs. In addition, FDA has, on occasion, waived requirements for drugs marketed under an EUA.

Generally, EUAs for unapproved products or unapproved uses of approved products require that manufacturers distribute factsheets for healthcare providers, addressing significant known and potential benefits and risk, and the extent to which benefits and risks are unknown, and the fact that FDA has authorized emergency use; and, distribution of factsheets for recipients of the product, addressing significant known and potential benefits and risk, and the extent to which benefits and risks are unknown, the option to accept or refuse the product, the consequences of refusing, available alternatives, and the fact that FDA has authorized emergency use.

Generally, EUAs for unapproved products and, per FDA’s discretion, EUAs for unapproved uses of approved products, include requirements for adverse event monitoring and reporting, and other recordkeeping and reporting requirements. Note, however, that approved products are already subject to equivalent requirements.

In addition, FDA may include various requirements in an EUA as a matter of discretion as deemed necessary to protect the public health, including restrictions on which entities may distribute the product, and how to perform distribution (including requiring that distribution be limited to government entities), restrictions on who may administer the product, requirements for collection and analysis of safety and effectiveness data, waivers of cGMP, and restrictions applicable to prescription drugs or restricted devices (including advertising and promotion restrictions).

The FDA may revoke an EUA where it is determined that the underlying health emergency no longer exists or warrants such authorization, if the conditions for the issuance of the EUA are no longer met, or if other circumstances make revocation appropriate to protect the public health or safety.

FDA Approval and Regulation of Companion Diagnostics

A therapeutic product may rely upon an in vitro companion diagnostic for use in selecting the patients that will be more likely to respond to that therapy. If safe and effective use of a therapeutic depends on an in vitro diagnostic, then the FDA generally will 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, for novel drugs, a companion diagnostic device and its corresponding therapeutic should be approved or cleared contemporaneously by the FDA for the use indicated in the therapeutic product’s labeling. In July 2016, the FDA issued a draft guidance intended to assist sponsors of the drug therapeutic and in vitro companion diagnostic device on issues related to co-development of the products.

If FDA determines that a companion diagnostic device is essential to the safe and effective use of a novel therapeutic product or indication, FDA generally will not approve the therapeutic product or new therapeutic product indication if the companion diagnostic device is not 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. The review of any in vitro companion diagnostics developed for use with any of our therapeutic products will, therefore, likely involve coordination of review by the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research or Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, as applicable, and the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health Office of In Vitro Diagnostics Device Evaluation and Safety.

Under the FDCA, in vitro diagnostics, including companion diagnostics, are regulated as medical devices. In the United States, the FDCA and its implementing regulations, and other federal and state statutes and regulations govern, among other things, medical device design and development, preclinical and clinical testing, premarket clearance or approval, registration and listing, manufacturing, labeling, storage, advertising and promotion, sales and distribution, export and import, and post-market surveillance. Unless an exemption applies, diagnostic tests require marketing clearance or approval from the FDA prior to commercial distribution. The two primary types of FDA marketing authorization applicable to a medical device are premarket notification, also called 510(k) clearance, and premarket approval, or PMA. The FDA has generally required PMAs for in vitro companion diagnostics.

The PMA process, including the gathering of clinical and preclinical data and the submission to and review by the FDA, can take several years or longer. It involves a rigorous premarket review during which the applicant must prepare and provide the FDA with reasonable assurance of the device’s safety and effectiveness and information about the device and its components regarding, among other things, device design, manufacturing and labeling. PMA applications are subject to an application fee of $365,657 for most PMAs for fiscal year 2021. In addition, PMAs for certain devices must generally include the results from extensive preclinical and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to establish the safety and effectiveness of the device for each indication for which FDA approval is sought. In particular, for a diagnostic, a PMA application typically requires data regarding analytical and clinical validation studies. As part of the PMA review, the FDA will typically inspect the manufacturer’s facilities for compliance with the Quality System Regulation, or QSR, which imposes elaborate testing, control, documentation and other quality assurance requirements.

PMA approval is not guaranteed, and the FDA may ultimately respond to a PMA submission with a not approvable determination based on deficiencies in the application and require additional clinical trial or other data that may be expensive and time-consuming to generate and that can substantially delay approval. If the FDA’s evaluation of the PMA application is favorable, the FDA typically issues an approvable letter requiring the applicant’s agreement to specific conditions, such as changes in labeling, or specific additional information, such as submission of final labeling, in order to secure final approval of the PMA. If the FDA’s evaluation of the PMA or manufacturing facilities is not favorable, the FDA will deny approval of the PMA or issue a not approvable letter. A not approvable letter will outline the deficiencies in the application and, where practical, will identify what is necessary to make the PMA approvable. The FDA may also determine that additional clinical trials are necessary, in which case the PMA approval may be delayed for several months or years while the trials are conducted and then the data submitted in an amendment to the PMA. If the FDA concludes that the applicable criteria have been met, the FDA will issue a PMA for the approved indications, which can be more limited than those originally sought by the applicant. The PMA can include post-approval conditions that the FDA believes necessary to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the device, including, among other things, restrictions on labeling, promotion, sale and distribution. Once granted, PMA approval may be withdrawn by the FDA if compliance with post approval requirements, conditions of approval or other regulatory standards are not maintained or problems are identified following initial marketing.

After a device is placed on the market, it remains subject to significant regulatory requirements. Medical devices may be marketed only for the uses and indications for which they are cleared or approved. Device manufacturers must also establish registration and device listings with the FDA. A medical device manufacturer’s manufacturing processes and those of its suppliers are required to comply with the applicable portions of the QSR, which cover the methods and documentation of the design, testing, production, processes, controls, quality assurance, labeling, packaging and shipping of medical devices. Domestic facility records and manufacturing processes are subject to periodic unscheduled inspections by the FDA. The FDA also may inspect foreign facilities that export products to the U.S.

Post-Approval Requirements

FDA Requirements

Drugs manufactured or distributed pursuant to FDA approvals are subject to pervasive and continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, requirements relating to recordkeeping, periodic reporting, product sampling and distribution, advertising and promotion with the product. After approval, most changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications or other labeling claims, are subject to prior FDA review and approval. There also are continuing, annual user fee requirements for any marketed products and the establishments at which such products are manufactured, as well as new application fees for supplemental applications with clinical data.

Oftentimes, even after a drug has been approved by the FDA for sale, the FDA may require that certain post-approval requirements be satisfied, including the conduct of additional clinical studies. If such post-approval requirements are not satisfied, the FDA may withdraw its approval of the drug. In addition, holders of an approved NDA or BLA are required to report certain adverse reactions to the FDA, comply with certain requirements concerning advertising and promotional labeling for their products, and continue to have quality control and manufacturing procedures conform to cGMP after approval. In addition, drug manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved drugs are required to register their establishments with the FDA and state agencies, and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and these state agencies for compliance with cGMP requirements. Changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated and often require prior FDA approval before being implemented. FDA regulations also require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMP and impose reporting and documentation requirements upon the sponsor and any third-party manufacturers that the sponsor may decide to use. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money, and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain cGMP compliance.

Among the conditions for an NDA or BLA approval is the requirement that the manufacturing operations conform on an ongoing basis with cGMP. In complying with cGMP, we must expend time, money and effort in the areas of training, production and quality control within our own organization and at our contract manufacturing facilities. A successful inspection of the manufacturing facility by the FDA is usually a prerequisite for final approval of a pharmaceutical product. Following approval of the NDA or BLA, we and our manufacturers will remain subject to periodic inspections by the FDA to assess compliance with cGMP requirements and the conditions of approval. We will also face similar inspections coordinated by foreign regulatory authorities. The FDA periodically inspects the sponsor’s records related to safety reporting and/or manufacturing facilities; this latter effort includes assessment of compliance with cGMP. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money, and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain cGMP compliance.

Once an approval is granted, the FDA may withdraw the approval if compliance with regulatory requirements and standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the market. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in revisions to the approved labeling to add new safety information; imposition of post-market studies or clinical trials to assess new safety risks; or imposition of distribution or other restrictions under a REMS program. Other potential consequences include, among other things:

	·	restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of the product, including total or partial suspension of production, complete withdrawal of the product from the market or product recalls;
	·	fines, warning letters or holds on post-approval clinical trials;
	·	refusal of the FDA to approve pending NDAs or supplements to approved NDAs, or suspension or revocation of product license approvals;
	·	product seizure or detention, or refusal to permit the import or export of products; or
	·	injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.

The FDA strictly regulates marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of products that are placed on the market. Drugs may be promoted only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off label uses, and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off label uses may be subject to significant liability.

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

Pricing, Coverage and Reimbursement

Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of any of our products, if any when approved. Sales of pharmaceutical products depend, in part, on the availability of sufficient coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors, which include government health programs, such as Medicare, Medicaid, TRICARE, and the Veterans Administration, as well as commercial insurance, and managed healthcare organizations. Prices at which we or our customers seek reimbursement for our therapeutic product candidates can be subject to challenge, reduction, or denial by payors. Third-party payors may limit coverage to specific products on an approved list or formulary, which might not include all of the FDA-approved products for a particular indication. Also, third-party payors may refuse to include a particular branded drug on their formularies or otherwise restrict patient access to a branded drug when a less costly generic equivalent or another alternative is available. Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the prices charged for medical products and services. Additionally, the containment of healthcare costs has become a priority of federal and state governments, and the prices of drugs have been a focus in this effort. The U.S. government, state legislatures and foreign governments have shown significant interest in implementing cost-containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products.

The process for determining whether a payor will provide coverage for a product is typically separate from the process for setting the reimbursement rate that the payor will pay for the product. A payor’s decision to provide coverage for a product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be available. Additionally, in the United States there is no uniform policy among payors for determining coverage or reimbursement. Many third-party payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own coverage and reimbursement policies, but also have their own methods and approval processes. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for products can differ significantly from payor to payor. One third-party payor’s decision to cover a particular medical product or service does not ensure that other payors will also provide coverage for the medical product or service, or will provide coverage at an adequate reimbursement rate. As a result, the coverage determination process will require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our products to each payor separately and will likely be a time-consuming process. If coverage and adequate reimbursement are not available, or are available only at limited levels, successful commercialization of, and obtaining a satisfactory financial return on, any product we develop may not be possible.

Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the price and examining the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of medical products and services, in addition to their safety and efficacy. In order to obtain coverage and reimbursement for any product that might be approved for marketing, we may need to conduct expensive studies in order to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of any products, which would be in addition to the costs expended to obtain regulatory approvals. Third-party payors may not consider our product candidates to be medically necessary or cost-effective compared to other available therapies, or payor negotiations may not enable us to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on our investment in drug development. If these third-party payors do not consider our products to be cost-effective compared to other therapies, they may not cover our products once approved as a benefit under their plans or, if they do, the level of reimbursement may not be sufficient to allow us to sell our products on a profitable basis. Decreases in third-party reimbursement for our products once approved or a decision by a third-party payor to not cover our products could reduce or eliminate utilization of our products and have an adverse effect on our sales, results of operations, and financial condition.

Additionally, efforts to contain healthcare costs (including drug prices) has become a priority of federal and state governments. The U.S. government, state legislatures, and foreign governments have shown significant interest in implementing cost-containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement, and requirements for substitution by generic products. There has also been heightened governmental scrutiny recently over the manner in which drug manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several Congressional inquiries and proposed bills designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. We anticipate additional state and federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future. These may include price controls and cost-containment measures, or more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, and potentially could reduce demand for our products once approved, create additional pricing pressures, or ultimately limit our net revenue and results.

In addition, in some non-U.S. jurisdictions, the proposed pricing for a product candidate must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. The requirements governing drug pricing vary widely from country to country. For example, the EU provides options for its member states to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. A member state may approve a specific price for the medicinal product or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market. There can be no assurance that any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for pharmaceutical products will allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements for any of our product candidates. Historically, product candidates launched in the EU do not follow price structures of the U.S. and generally tend to have price structures that are significantly lower.

Coverage and reimbursement of our COVID-19 vaccine candidate, which has not yet been granted EUA status, may be subject to unique regulatory policies. Under the ACA preventive care mandate, non-grandfathered group health plans and health insurance coverage offered in the individual or group market typically have at least one year before it must provide first-dollar coverage for a newly issued preventive care requirement or guideline. However, pursuant to the CARES Act, non-grandfathered group health plans and health insurance coverage offered in the individual or group market must cover any qualifying coronavirus preventive service 15 business days after the United States Preventive Services Task Force, or Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) designates such service as preventive. Third-party reimbursement for providers administering any approved COVID-19 vaccine may affect market acceptance of the product. Currently, the CARES Act and its implementing regulations state (i) providers that participate in the CDC COVID-19 Vaccination Program must administer a COVID-19 immunization regardless of an individual’s ability to pay or health insurance coverage status, (ii) providers may not seek any reimbursement, including through balance billing, from an immunization recipient, (iii) that coverage is required, without cost-sharing, for the administration of the immunization even if a third party, such as the federal government, pays for the cost of the immunization, and (iv) that private health insurance plans must cover COVID-19 immunizations and their administration even when provided by out-of-network providers for the duration of the public health emergency for COVID-19. There is no guarantee payors will provide coverage and reimbursement for our COVID-19 vaccine, if approved, during or after the termination of the public health emergency, nor can we guarantee that even if coverage is provided, the approved reimbursement amount will be high enough to allow us to establish or maintain pricing sufficient to realize a sufficient return on our investment.

Under the CARES Act and an accompanying interim final rule, Medicare beneficiaries are expected to have coverage for COVID-19 vaccines through Medicare Part B with no cost sharing. Coverage is further expected to apply whether the vaccine receives FDA authorization through an EUA or is licensed under a BLA and will likely extend to employer-sponsored and individual health plans subject to the ACA’s preventive services standards. The outcome of current and future clinical trials, as well as the market demand for COVID-19 vaccines may impact patient eligibility and future coverage determinations. It is unclear whether the FDA will approve the administration of our COVID-19 vaccine, and if so if approval will extend to children and adolescents, or if the vaccine will be required to be administered once (i.e. one-time, double dose), annually, or if future booster shots will be required. We cannot predict continued prevalence of COVID-19, whether herd immunity will be achieved which would affect the need for future administration of the vaccine, or whether the vaccine would be effective against future mutations or variants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Such factors may impact whether our vaccine, if approved, would be reimbursable under Medicare Part D rather than Part B and if our vaccine, if approved would be excluded from participating in certain federal entitlement programs such as the Vaccines for Children Program.

Other Healthcare Fraud and Abuse Laws

Although we currently do not have any products on the market, our activities, including current and future arrangements with investigators, healthcare professionals, consultants, third-party payors and customers, may be subject to additional healthcare laws, regulations and enforcement by the federal government and by authorities in the states and foreign jurisdictions in which we conduct our business. Such laws include, without limitation, state and federal anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, false claims, privacy and security, price reporting, and physician sunshine laws. Some of our pre-commercial activities also may be subject to some of these laws.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, any person or entity, including a prescription drug manufacturer or a party acting on its behalf, from knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting or receiving any remuneration, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, to induce or in return for purchasing, leasing, ordering or arranging for the purchase, lease or order of any item or service reimbursable, in whole or in part, under Medicare, Medicaid or other federal healthcare programs. The term “remuneration” has been interpreted broadly to include anything of value. The Anti-Kickback Statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between therapeutic product manufacturers on one hand and prescribers, purchasers, and formulary managers on the other. There are a number of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting some common activities from prosecution. The exceptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly and practices that involve remuneration that may be alleged to be intended to induce prescribing, purchasing or recommending may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exception or safe harbor. Failure to meet all of the requirements of a particular applicable statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor does not make the conduct per se illegal under the Anti-Kickback Statute. Instead, the legality of the arrangement will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis based on a cumulative review of all of its facts and circumstances. Several courts have interpreted the statute’s intent requirement to mean that if any one purpose of an arrangement involving remuneration is to induce referrals of federal healthcare covered business, the Anti-Kickback Statute has been violated. Additionally, the intent standard under the Anti-Kickback Statute was amended by the ACA to a stricter standard such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. In addition, the ACA codified case law that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal False Claims Act, or FCA. Violations of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute may result in civil monetary penalties up to $100,000 for each violation, plus up to three times the remuneration involved. Civil penalties for such conduct can further be assessed under the federal False Claims Act. Violations can also result in criminal penalties, including criminal fines of up to $100,000 and imprisonment of up to 10 years. Similarly, violations can result in exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs, including Medicare and Medicaid.

On November 20, 2020, OIG issued two final regulations implementing significant modifications to regulatory safe harbors to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute. The first rule finalized new safe harbors and modified existing safe harbors to promote certain value-based and coordinated care arrangements and reduce regulatory burden, which are scheduled to become effective January 19, 2021. The second rule (the Rebate Rule) created new safe harbor protection, scheduled to become effective January 29, 2021, for certain (i) point-of-sale discounts from pharmaceutical manufacturers to Medicare Part D plans, Medicaid managed care organizations, and their contracted pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), and (ii) fees for certain services that PBMs provide to pharmaceutical manufacturers. In addition, the Rebate Rule revised the discount safe harbor to exclude from protection price reductions (e.g., rebates) for pharmaceutical products from manufacturers to Part D plans when made directly or indirectly through a PBM, a change that is scheduled to become effective January 1, 2022. The Rebate Rule is intended to create incentives for manufacturers, covered plans, and PBMs to shift from retrospective rebates to point-of-sale discounts, potentially lowering list prices of, and reducing consumers’ out-of-pocket costs for, prescription drugs. In a court order filed on January 30, 2021, the Biden Administration agreed to delay the implementation of provisions of the rule that were scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2022 by one year until January 1, 2023 in response to a suit brought by the Pharmaceutical Care Management Association (PCMA) challenging the rule. The postponement does not affect provisions of the rule that were scheduled to take effect prior to January 1, 2022. PMCA’s case will be held in abeyance pending the duration of HHS’s review of the rule, subject to the continued consent of the parties. We cannot predict the outcome of the Biden Administration’s review of the Rebate Rule or the outcome of any subsequent litigation by PMCA. The federal civil False Claims Act, prohibits, among other things, any person or entity from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, for payment to, or approval by, federal programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, claims for items or services, including drugs, that are false or fraudulent or not provided as claimed. Persons and entities can be held liable under these laws if they are deemed to “cause” the submission of false or fraudulent claims by, for example, providing inaccurate billing or coding information to customers or promoting a product off-label. In addition, certain of our future activities relating to the reporting of wholesaler or estimated retail prices for our products, the reporting of prices used to calculate Medicaid rebate information, and other information affecting federal, state, and third-party reimbursement for our products, and the sale and marketing of our products, are subject to scrutiny under this law. Penalties for federal civil False Claims Act violations may include up to three times the actual damages sustained by the government, plus mandatory civil penalties of between $11,665 and $23,331 for each separate false claim per false claim or statement for penalties assessed after June 19, 2020 with respect to violations occurring after November 2, 2015 (and penalties of between $5,500 and $11,000 per claim or statement with respect to violations occurring before that date). Other penalties include the potential for exclusion from participation in federal healthcare programs. Additionally, although the federal False Claims Act is a civil statute, False Claims Act violations may also implicate various federal criminal statutes.

There is also the federal criminal False Claims Act, which is similar to the federal civil False Claims Act and imposes criminal liability on those that make or present a false, fictitious or fraudulent claim to the federal government. The Federal Criminal Statute on False Statements Relating to Health Care Matters makes it a crime to knowingly and willfully falsify, conceal, or cover up a material fact, make any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations, or make or use any materially false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items, or services.

The Federal Civil Monetary Penalties Law, or the CMPL, authorizes the imposition of substantial monetary penalties against an entity, such as a pharmaceutical manufacturer, that engaged in activities including, among others (1) knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a claim for services not provided as claimed or that is otherwise false or fraudulent in any way; (2) arranging for or contracting with an individual or entity that is excluded from participation in federal health care programs to provide items or services reimbursable by a federal health care program; (3) violations of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute; or (4) failing to report and return a known overpayment.

HIPAA created additional federal criminal statutes that prohibit, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud or to obtain, by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations or promises, any money or property owned by, or under the control or custody of, any healthcare benefit program, including private third-party payors, willfully obstructing a criminal investigation of a healthcare offense, and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up by trick, scheme or device, a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services. Like the Anti-Kickback Statute, the ACA amended the intent standard for certain healthcare fraud statutes under HIPAA such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation.

We may be subject to data privacy and security regulations by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH, and its implementing regulations, imposes requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. Among other things, HITECH makes HIPAA’s privacy and security standards directly applicable to business associates, independent contractors, or agents of covered entities that receive or obtain protected health information in connection with providing a service on behalf of a covered entity. HITECH also created four new tiers of civil monetary penalties, amended HIPAA to make civil and criminal penalties directly applicable to business associates, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce HIPAA and seek attorneys’ fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. Regulatory guidance and obligations continue to evolve. For example, on December 10, 2020, the Office for Civil Rights issued a proposed rule aimed at reducing regulatory burdens that may exist in discouraging coordination of care, among other changes. As HIPAA requirements evolve, we may be required to update our compliance strategies or modify our business processes to comply.

In addition, many state laws govern the privacy and security of health information in specified circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways, are often not pre-empted by HIPAA, and may have a more prohibitive effect than HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts. For instance, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) became effective on January 1, 2020, giving California residents expanded privacy rights, and requiring businesses provide detailed information about their data practices. The CCPA provides for civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action for data breaches that is expected to increase data breach litigation. Although there are limited exemptions for PHI and certain clinical trial data, the CCPA’s implementation standards and enforcement practices may increase our compliance costs and legal risks. Additionally, the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA) was passed in November 2020, and will amend the CCPA beginning in 2023. The CPRA will impose additional data protection obligations on companies doing business in California, including additional consumer rights processes, limitations on data uses, new audit requirements for higher risk data, and opt outs for certain uses of sensitive data. It will also create a new California data protection agency authorized to issue substantive regulations and could result in increased privacy and information security enforcement. Additional state laws are being proposed, and new obligations may continue to arise. Additional compliance investment and potential business process changes may be required to respond to these rapidly changing privacy law landscape. If we fail to comply with existing or new privacy laws and regulations, we could face legal liability from regulatory actions or litigation, as well as reputational damage.

Additionally, the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act, or the Sunshine Act, created under the ACA, and its implementing regulations, require that certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biological and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (with certain exceptions) report annually to CMS information related to certain payments or other transfers of value made or distributed to physicians and teaching hospitals, or to entities or individuals at the request of, or designated on behalf of, the physicians and teaching hospitals and to report annually certain ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. Failure to submit timely, accurately and completely the required information for all payments, transfers of value and ownership or investment interests may result in civil monetary penalties of up to an aggregate of $176,495 per year and up to an aggregate of $1,176,638 per year for “knowing failures.” Covered manufacturers are required to submit reports on aggregate payment data to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on an annual basis. In addition, many states also govern the reporting of payments or other transfers of value, many of which differ from each other in significant ways, are often not pre-empted, and may have a more prohibitive effect than the Sunshine Act, thus further complicating compliance efforts. Many states have similar statutes or regulations to the above federal laws that may be broader in scope and may apply regardless of payor. We may also be subject to state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government, and/or state laws that require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers, drug pricing or marketing expenditures. These laws may differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, further complicating compliance efforts. Additionally, to the extent that we have business operations in foreign countries or sell any of our products in foreign countries and jurisdictions, including Japan or the European Union, we may be subject to additional regulation.

Although we do not currently have any products on the market, once our product candidates or clinical trials are covered by federal health care programs, we will be subject to additional healthcare statutory and regulatory requirements and enforcement by the federal and state governments of the jurisdictions in which we conduct our business. Because we intend to commercialize products that could be reimbursed under a federal healthcare program and other governmental healthcare programs, we intend to develop a comprehensive compliance program that establishes internal controls to facilitate adherence to the rules and program requirements to which we will or may become subject. Although the development and implementation of compliance programs designed to establish internal control and facilitate compliance can mitigate the risk of violating these laws, and the subsequent investigation, prosecution, and penalties assessed for violations of these laws, the risks cannot be entirely eliminated.

If our operations are found to be in violation of any of such laws or any other governmental regulations that apply to us, we may be subject, without limitation, to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, individual imprisonment, disgorgement, exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, additional oversight and reporting obligations pursuant to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with applicable laws and regulations, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our financial results.

Additionally, we expect our products, if and when approved, may be eligible for coverage under Medicare, the federal health care program that provides health care benefits to the aged and disabled, and covers outpatient services and supplies, including certain pharmaceutical products, that are medically necessary to treat a beneficiary’s health condition. In addition, our products may be covered and reimbursed under other government programs, such as Medicaid and the 340B Drug Pricing Program. The Medicaid Drug Rebate Program requires pharmaceutical manufacturers to enter into and have in effect a national rebate agreement with the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services as a condition for states to receive federal matching funds for the manufacturer’s outpatient drugs furnished to Medicaid patients. Under the 340B Drug Pricing Program, the manufacturer must extend discounts to entities that participate in the program. As part of the requirements to participate in certain government programs, many pharmaceutical manufacturers must calculate and report certain price reporting metrics to the government, such as average manufacturer price, or AMP, and best price. Penalties may apply in some cases when such metrics are not submitted accurately and timely.

Healthcare Reform

In the United States and foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes to healthcare systems that could affect our future results of operations. There have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of initiatives at the United States federal and state levels that seek to promote changes in the healthcare system with the stated goals of reducing healthcare costs, improving quality of care, and expanding access.

In the United States, the pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of healthcare reform efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative and regulatory initiatives, including the ACA, which has had, and is expected to continue to have, a significant impact on the healthcare industry. This law was designed to expand access to health insurance coverage for uninsured and underinsured individuals while at the same time containing overall healthcare costs. With regard to pharmaceutical products, among other things, the ACA contains provisions that may potentially affect the profitability of our products, including, for example, increased rebates for products sold to Medicaid programs, extension of Medicaid rebates to Medicaid managed care plans, mandatory discounts for certain products under Medicare Part D, expansion of entities eligible for discounts under the Public Health Service’s pharmaceutical pricing program, and a significant annual fee on companies that manufacture or import certain branded prescription drug products. Substantial new provisions affecting compliance have also been enacted, which may affect our business practices with healthcare providers and entities. The framework of the ACA and other healthcare reforms continues to evolve as a result of executive, legislative, regulatory, and administrative developments; in addition, healthcare-related litigation and judicial proceedings contribute to regulatory uncertainty. While Congress has not passed legislation to comprehensively repeal the ACA, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act included a provision that, effective January 1, 2019, changed to $0 the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by ACA on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year, which is commonly referred to as the “individual mandate.” In December 2018, a federal district court in Texas ruled that the individual mandate, with the penalty that was changed to $0 effective January 1, 2019, was unconstitutional and, further, could not be severed from the other provisions of the ACA. As a result, the court ruled that all of the provisions of the ACA were invalid. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s ruling that the individual mandate was unconstitutional as a result of the amendment changing the penalty amount to $0, but it remanded the case back to the district court for further analysis of whether the individual mandate could be severed from the ACA. The Fifth Circuit’s decision was appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States, which granted certiorari on these issues and conducted oral argument in November 2020. The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to issue its decision in 2021. We cannot predict the full impact of this forthcoming decision or other efforts to challenge, repeal, replace, or alter the implementation of the ACA or other healthcare laws, regulations, or reforms.

Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. For example, the Budget Control Act of 2011 included reductions to Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect on April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislation, will stay in effect through 2030 unless additional Congressional action is taken, with the exception of a temporary suspension of the payment reduction from May 1, 2020 through December 31, 2020 enacted as part of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, or the CARES Act. Additionally, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several providers and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. Further, effective January 1, 2019, the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, among other things, further amended portions of the Social Security Act implemented as part of the ACA to increase from 50% to 70% the point-of-sale discount that pharmaceutical manufacturers participating in the Coverage Gap Discount Program must provide to eligible Medicare Part D beneficiaries during the coverage gap phase of the Part D benefit, commonly referred to as the “donut hole,” and to reduce standard beneficiary cost sharing in the coverage gap from 30% to 25% in most Medicare Part D plans. In the future, there may be additional challenges and/or amendments to the ACA. It remains to be seen precisely what any new legislation will provide, when or if it will be enacted, and what impact it may have on the availability and cost of healthcare items and services, including drug products.

In addition, in recent years the pricing and costs of prescription pharmaceuticals has been the subject of considerable discussion in the United States. A number of federal reports and inquiries have focused on these issues, and various legislative and regulatory provisions have been proposed and enacted at the federal and state level that seek to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, reduce the out-of-pocket cost of prescription drugs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. Additionally, on December 21, 2020, Congress passed a $900 billion U.S. coronavirus relief and government appropriations legislation, or the Act, which contains several important new drug price reporting and transparency measures that could result in additional transparency with respect to manufacturers’ prescription drug prices. Among other things, the Act includes provisions requiring Medicare Part D prescription drug plan, or the PDP, sponsors and Medicare Advantage organizations, or MAOs, to implement tools to display Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit information in real time and provisions requiring group and health insurance issuers offering health insurance coverage to report information on certain pharmacy benefit and drug costs to the Secretaries of HHS, Labor, and the Treasury.

Further, the incoming Biden Administration and the new Congress may pursue additional and potentially significant changes to the current healthcare laws, regulations, and related guidance. The Biden Administration issued a memorandum on January 20, 2021 (President Biden’s inauguration day) that, like similar memoranda issued by prior incoming Administrations, directed federal agencies to take steps to halt, delay, or conduct further review of certain regulatory actions taken by the Trump Administration, such as those that had not taken effect by inauguration day. We cannot predict what regulatory actions the Biden Administration will take as a result of its review. We also cannot predict what other healthcare reforms will ultimately be implemented at the federal or state level or the effect of any future legislation or regulation. Accordingly, we face uncertainties that might result from additional reforms.

From time to time, legislation is drafted, introduced and passed in Congress that could significantly change the statutory provisions governing the testing, approval, manufacturing and marketing of products regulated by the FDA. In addition to new legislation, FDA regulations and policies are often revised or interpreted by the agency in ways that may significantly affect our business and our products. It is impossible to predict whether further legislative changes will be enacted or whether FDA regulations, guidance, policies or interpretations will be changed or what the effect of such changes, if any, may be.

Corporate Information

Our corporate headquarters are located at 8840 Wilshire Blvd., 2nd Floor, Beverly Hills, California 90211. Our telephone number is (310) 358-3200 and our internet address is www.capricor.com. The information on, or accessible through, our website is not part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We have included our website address in this Annual Report on Form 10-K solely as an inactive textual reference.

Employees

Currently, we have 26 full-time employees. None of our employees are covered by a collective bargaining agreement. We believe that our relations with our employees are satisfactory. We have also retained several consultants to perform various operational and administrative functions. Certain officers of Capricor are also serving as officers of the Company.

Description of Property

We do not own any real property. Our principal offices are located at 8840 Wilshire Blvd., 2nd Floor, Beverly Hills, California 90211. Capricor leases space for its corporate offices from The Bubble Real Estate Company, LLC pursuant to a lease that was originally effective for a two-year period beginning July 1, 2013 with an option to extend the lease for an additional twelve months. Capricor subsequently entered into several amendments extending the term of the lease and modifying its terms. Effective January 1, 2021, we entered into an amendment with the Bubble Real Estate Company, LLC pursuant to which we extended our lease for an additional year ending December 31, 2021. The lease is terminable by either party upon 90 days’ written notice to the other party. The monthly rental payment is $13,073 for this annual period.

Capricor leases facilities from CSMC pursuant to a lease, or the Facilities Lease, that was originally effective for a three-year period beginning June 1, 2014. Capricor has subsequently entered into several amendments extending the term of the lease and modifying its terms. In July 2020, Capricor exercised its option to extend the term of the Facilities Lease for an additional 12-month period through July 31, 2021 with a monthly lease payment of $15,805. The Company has a further option to extend the Facilities Lease with respect to a portion of the leased premises through July 31, 2022 and a monthly lease payment of $10,707. The premises leased from CSMC are located at 8700 Beverly Blvd., Los Angeles, California 90048. At this time, we are actively considering new facilities for our research, development and/or manufacturing activities or the possible extension of our current lease.

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

Investment in our common stock involves significant risk. You should carefully consider the information described in the following risk factors, together with the other information appearing elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, before making an investment decision regarding our common stock. If any of the events or circumstances described in these risks actually occur, our business, financial condition, results of operations and future growth prospects would likely be materially and adversely affected. In these circumstances, the market price of our common stock could decline, and you may lose all or a part of your investment in our common stock. Moreover, the risks described below are not the only ones that we face.

Summary Risk Factors

Our business is subject to a number of risks, including risks that may prevent us from achieving our business objectives or may adversely affect our business, clinical and commercialization activities, the manufacturing of our product candidates, intellectual property, third-party relationships, competition factors, product and environmental liability, and common stock. These risks are discussed more fully below and include, but are not limited to, risks related to:

Risks Related to Our Business

	·	the COVID-19 pandemic, including its impact on our business and operations;
	·	substantial additional funding is needed to complete the development of our product candidates;
	·	the Company has incurred significant losses and may never be profitable;
	·	the occurrence of security breaches, improper access to or disclosure of our data or user data, and other cyber incidents or undesirable cyber activity related to our, or our third party vendor’s systems and data;
	·	we may not have adequate personnel and may not be able to attract or retain personnel needed to develop our products;

Risks Related to Clinical and Commercialization Activities

	·	our success depends upon the viability of our product candidates, all of which require regulatory approval to commercialize and we cannot be certain any of them will receive regulatory approval to be commercialized;
	·	delays in commencement, enrollment, and completion of clinical testing could result in increased costs to us and delay or limit our ability to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates;
	·	our exosome technologies are unproven in their ability to achieve sufficient biological activity or scale in development to date;
	·	product candidates can fail to meet their efficacy endpoints at any time during the clinical development process, which would likely make them ineligible for becoming commercial products;

Risks Related to the Manufacturing of our Product Candidates

	·	the manufacturing of our product candidates is heavily reliant on supply chain requirements including the availability of raw materials that are critical for the manufacturing of our product candidates;
	·	we rely upon third party manufacturers for the expansion of our manufacturing capabilities for later-stage clinical trials and for ultimate commercialization;
	·	we may not have adequate manufacturing facilities required for any scale-up of manufacturing which may be required in the future;

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

	·	our ability to obtain, maintain, protect, and enforce our intellectual property rights;
	·	potential challenges to the enforceability or scope of our intellectual property;
	·	potential claims from third parties that we are infringing their patents or other intellectual property rights;

Risks Related to Our Relationships with Third Parties

we depend on our relationships with our licensors and collaborators and there is no guarantee that such relationships will continue;

Risks Related to Competitive Factors

	·	our products will likely face intense competition;
	·	any of our product candidates for which we receive regulatory approval may not achieve broad market acceptance, which could limit the revenue that we will generate from their sales, if any;

Risks Related to Product and Environmental Liability

our products may expose us to potential product liability;

Risks Related to Our Common Stock

	·	we expect that our stock price will continue to fluctuate significantly; and
	·	we have never paid dividends and we do not anticipate paying dividends in the future.

Risks Related to Our Business

We need substantial additional funding before we can complete the development of our product candidates. If we are unable to obtain such additional capital, we will be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our product development and clinical programs and may not have the capital required to otherwise operate our business.

Developing biopharmaceutical products, including conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials and establishing manufacturing capabilities, is expensive. As of December 31, 2020, we had cash and cash equivalents totaling approximately $32.7 million. We have not generated any revenues from the commercial sale of products. We will not be able to generate any product revenues until, and only if, we receive approval to sell our drug candidates from the FDA or other regulatory authorities.

From inception, we have financed our operations through public and private sales of our equity securities, grants from the National Institutes of Health, or NIH, and the Department of Defense, or DoD, and a loan commitment and grant award from the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, or CIRM. As we have not generated any revenue from commercial sales to date and we do not expect to generate revenue for several years, if ever, we will need to raise substantial additional capital in order to fund our general corporate activities and to fund our research and development, including our ongoing clinical trials and plans for new clinical trials and product development.

We may seek to raise additional funds through various potential sources, such as equity and debt financings, or through strategic collaborations and license agreements. We can give no assurances that we will be able to secure such additional sources of funds to support our operations or, if such funds are available to us, that such additional financing will be sufficient to meet our needs. Moreover, to the extent that we raise additional funds by issuing equity securities, our stockholders may experience additional significant dilution, and debt financing, if available, may involve restrictive covenants. To the extent that we raise additional funds through collaboration and licensing arrangements, it may be necessary to relinquish some rights to our technologies or our product candidates, or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us.

If we are unable to raise sufficient funds to support our current and planned operations, we may elect to discontinue certain of our ongoing activities or programs. The inability to raise additional funds could also prevent us from taking advantage of opportunities to pursue promising new or existing programs in the future.

Our forecasts regarding our beliefs in the sufficiency of our financial resources to support our current and planned operations are forward-looking statements and involve significant risks and uncertainties, and actual results could vary as a result of a number of factors, including the factors discussed elsewhere in this “Risk Factors” section. We have based these estimates on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could utilize our available capital resources sooner than we currently expect. Our future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including, but not limited to:

	·	the scope, rate of progress, cost and results of our research and development activities, especially our CAP-1002 and exosomes programs;
	·	the next steps in the development of our Duchenne muscular dystrophy, or DMD, program, which may potentially include a Phase III clinical trial for our CAP-1002 product candidate in DMD;
	·	the availability of funding from government programs including the NIH, and DoD, if applicable;
	·	the costs of developing adequate manufacturing processes and facilities;
	·	the costs associated with and timing of regulatory approval;
	·	the costs of filing, prosecuting, defending and enforcing any patent claims and other intellectual property rights;
	·	the costs and risks involved in conducting clinical trials and manufacturing operations in the U.S. and internationally;
	·	the effect of competing technological and market developments;
	·	the terms and timing of any collaboration, licensing or other arrangements that we may establish;
	·	the cost and timing of technology transfer for, and completion of, clinical and commercial-scale outsourced manufacturing activities; and
	·	the costs of establishing sales, marketing and distribution capabilities for any product candidates for which we may receive regulatory approval.

We have a history of net losses, and we expect losses to continue for the foreseeable future. In addition, a number of factors may cause our operating results to fluctuate on a quarterly and annual basis, which may make it difficult to predict our future performance.

We have a history of net losses, expect to continue to incur substantial net losses for the foreseeable future, and may never achieve or maintain profitability. Our operations to date have been primarily limited to organizing and staffing our company, developing our technology, and undertaking preclinical studies and clinical trials of our product candidates. We have not yet obtained regulatory approval for any of our product candidates. Specifically, our financial condition and operating results have varied significantly in the past and will continue to fluctuate from quarter-to-quarter and year-to-year in the future due to a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control. Factors relating to our business that may contribute to these fluctuations include the following factors:

	·	our need for substantial additional capital to fund our trials and development programs;
	·	delays in the commencement, enrollment, and timing of clinical testing;
	·	the viability of CAP-1002 as a potential product candidate for the treatment of DMD and COVID-19 and its development through all stages of clinical development;
	·	the viability of our exosome technologies as potential product candidates and the advancement of our exosome technologies through all stages of its preclinical and clinical development;
	·	any delays in regulatory review and approval of our product candidates in clinical development;
	·	our ability to receive regulatory approval or commercialize our product candidates, within and outside the United States;
	·	potential side effects of our current or future products and product candidates that could delay or prevent commercialization or cause an approved treatment drug to be taken off the market;
	·	market acceptance of our product candidates;
	·	our ability to establish an effective sales and marketing infrastructure once our products are commercialized or to establish partnerships with other companies who have greater sales and marketing capabilities;
	·	our ability to establish or maintain collaborations, licensing or other arrangements, including strategic partnerships for CAP-1002 and our exosomes technologies;
	·	our ability and third parties’ abilities to obtain and protect intellectual property rights;
	·	competition from existing products or new products that may emerge;
	·	guidelines and recommendations of therapies published by various organizations;
	·	the ability of patients to obtain coverage of, or sufficient reimbursement for, our products;
	·	our ability to maintain adequate insurance policies;
	·	our ability to successfully manufacture our product candidates in sufficient quantities and on a timely basis to meet clinical trial and potential commercial demand;
	·	our dependency on third parties to formulate and manufacture our product candidates;

	·	our ability to maintain our current manufacturing facility, including our ability to achieve and maintain current Good Manufacturing Practices, or cGMP, certification, and to secure other facilities as determined to be necessary;
	·	costs related to and outcomes of potential intellectual property litigation;
	·	compliance with obligations under intellectual property licenses with third parties;
	·	our ability to implement additional internal systems and infrastructure;
	·	our ability to adequately support future growth;
	·	if our products are approved for commercial sale, the ability to secure reimbursement for our products;
	·	our ability to attract and retain key personnel to manage our business effectively; and
	·	the ability of members of our senior management who have limited experience in managing a public company to manage our business and operations.

The Company’s technology is not yet proven and each of our product candidates is still in clinical or preclinical development.

The Company’s product candidates, CAP-1002 and our exosome technologies, are in development and each requires further and, in some cases, extensive clinical testing before it may be approved by the FDA, or another regulatory authority in a jurisdiction outside the United States, which could take several years to complete, if ever. The Company’s failure to establish the efficacy of its technologies would have a material adverse effect on the Company. We cannot predict with any certainty the results of such clinical testing, including the results of any potential Phase III trial of our CAP-1002 product candidate in DMD. Additionally, we cannot predict with any certainty if, or when, we might commence any additional clinical trials of our product candidates, whether we will be able to secure a partner to fund and/or conduct a potential Phase III trial, or whether our current trials will yield sufficient data to permit us to proceed with additional clinical development and ultimately submit an application for regulatory approval of our product candidates in the United States or abroad, or whether such applications will be accepted by the appropriate regulatory agencies. We are also unable to predict whether our preclinical studies of our exosomes products will result in a viable clinical development program.

Our business depends entirely on the successful development and commercialization of our product candidates. We currently have no products approved for sale and generate no revenues from sales of any products, and we may never be able to develop a marketable product.

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

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

	·	successful and timely completion of our clinical trials;
	·	initiation and successful patient enrollment and completion of additional clinical trials on a timely basis;
	·	the impact of COVID-19 on our operations, ability to conduct clinical trials and on the ability of our regulators to review and approve or authorize our products;
	·	our ability to demonstrate our products’ safety, tolerability and efficacy to the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority for emergency use authorization (EUA) or marketing approval;
	·	timely receipt of an EUA or marketing approval for our products;
	·	obtaining and maintaining patent protection, trade secret protection and regulatory exclusivity, both in the United States and internationally;
	·	successfully defending and enforcing our rights in our intellectual property portfolio;
	·	avoiding and successfully defending against any claims that we have infringed, misappropriated or otherwise violated any intellectual property of any third party;
	·	the performance of our current and future collaborators, if any;
	·	the extent of, and our ability to timely complete, any required post-marketing approval commitments imposed by FDA or other applicable regulatory authorities;
	·	successfully developing a companion diagnostic test on a timely and cost effective basis, if required;
	·	establishment of supply arrangements with third-party raw materials and drug product suppliers and manufacturers who are able to manufacture clinical trial and commercial quantities of drug substance and drug product and to develop, validate and maintain a commercially viable manufacturing process that is compliant with current good manufacturing practices, or cGMP, at a scale sufficient to meet anticipated demand and over time enable us to reduce our cost of manufacturing;

	·	establishment of scaled production arrangements with third-party manufacturers to obtain finished products that are compliant with cGMP and appropriately packaged for sale;
	·	successful launch of commercial sales following any EUA or marketing approval;
	·	a continued acceptable safety profile following any EUA or marketing approval;
	·	commercial acceptance by patients, the medical community and third-party payors;
	·	the availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement and pricing by third-party payors and government authorities;
	·	the availability, perceived advantages, relative cost, relative safety and relative efficacy of alternative and competing treatments; and
	·	our ability to compete with other therapies.

We do not have complete control over many of these factors, including certain aspects of clinical development and the regulatory submission process, potential threats to our intellectual property rights and the manufacturing, marketing, distribution and sales efforts of any future collaborator. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that we will ever be able to generate revenue through the sale of our products. If we are not successful in marketing or commercializing our products, or are significantly delayed in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.

Business disruptions such as natural disasters, widespread infectious diseases or pandemics could seriously harm our future revenues and financial condition and increase our costs and expenses.

Our corporate headquarters and manufacturing facilities are located in the greater Los Angeles, California area, a region known for seismic activity, as well as being susceptible to drought and fires. A significant natural disaster, such as an earthquake, flood or fire, occurring at our headquarters or manufacturing facilities, or at the facilities of any third-party manufacturer or vendor, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, outbreaks of viruses, infectious diseases or pandemics (including, for example, the outbreak of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19)), terrorist acts or acts of war targeted at the United States, and specifically the Los Angeles, California region, could cause damage or disruption to us, our employees, facilities, contractors and collaborators, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The coronavirus outbreak could adversely impact our business.

An epidemic or pandemic disease outbreak, including the 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19), could severely disrupt our operations or the operations of third parties that we depend on, including our single third-party contract manufacturer, our CROs, clinical data management organizations, medical institutions and clinical investigators, and have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects. In December 2019, it was first reported that there had been an outbreak of a novel strain of coronavirus (COVID-19), in China. COVID-19 has since spread globally and while cases and hospitalization are currently on the decline in the US, there can be no assurances they will not continue at the current rate or increase in the future especially in light of the number of variants that are emerging across the world. Governments in the United States and elsewhere have taken and are continuing to take severe measures to slow the spread of COVID-19, including requiring that certain businesses close or conduct only the minimum necessary operations.

As COVID-19 continues to spread, we may experience disruptions that could severely impact our business, including:

delays or difficulties in enrolling patients in our clinical trials and having patients complete their assessments in accordance with the clinical protocol;

restrictions preventing trial investigators, patients or other critical staff from traveling to our trial sites;

diversion of healthcare resources to address COVID-19, which could limit the availability of medical facilities for our clinical trials;

forced closures, or reductions in operations, at our facilities or the facilities of third parties with whom we do business;

supply chain disruptions, which could have a material adverse effect on the availability or cost of materials for our product candidates; and

disruptions to our workforce, or the workforces of third parties with whom we do business, caused by sickness, travel restrictions or quarantines, including but not limited to the announcement on March 19, 2020 by the Governor of the State of California ordering all individuals living in the State of California to stay at home or at their place of residence.

Additionally, disruptions at the at FDA, the EMA and other regulators, caused by global health concerns, including the COVID-19 pandemic, including delays in inspections of clinical trial or manufacturing sites required as part of the application review process, could result in delays of reviews and approvals of our product candidate or our proposed clinical trials. For example, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, on March 10, 2020, the FDA announced its intention to postpone most inspections of foreign manufacturing facilities and products inspections of domestic manufacturing facilities through April 2020. On March 18, 2020, the FDA announced its intention to temporarily postpone routine surveillance inspections of domestic manufacturing facilities and provided guidance regarding the conduct of clinical trials. On July 10, 2020, the FDA announced that it is working toward the goal of restarting on-site inspections it deems to be “mission critical.” On August 19, 2020, the FDA published guidance clarifying how it intends to conduct inspections during the COVID-19 pandemic, including how it plans to determine which inspections are “mission-critical.” It is unclear how FDA’s policies and guidance will impact any inspections of our facilities, including our clinical trial sites. Regulatory authorities outside the United States may adopt similar restrictions or other policy measures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The global outbreak of COVID-19 continues to evolve and its ultimate impact on our business will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted. Any of the disruptions listed above, or other disruptions caused by new developments associated with the COVID-19 outbreak could severely impact our business.

A breakdown or breach of our information technology systems could subject us to liability or interrupt the operation of our business.

We are increasingly dependent upon information technology systems and data, as well as the information technology systems and data of our third party vendors, especially if we expand our clinical trials and therefore our databases of patient information. Our or our third party vendors’ computer systems are potentially vulnerable to breakdown, malicious intrusion and random attack. Likewise, data privacy or security breaches by individuals authorized to access our information technology systems or others may pose a risk that sensitive data, including intellectual property, trade secrets or personal information belonging to us, our patients, customers or other business partners, may be exposed to unauthorized persons or to the public. Cyber-attacks are increasing in their frequency, sophistication and intensity. While we continue to build and improve our information systems and infrastructure and believe we have taken appropriate security measures to minimize these risks to our data and information technology systems, we intend to defend against and respond to data security incidents, and there can be no assurance that our efforts will prevent breakdowns or breaches in our systems, or adequately contain and mitigate risks from a data security incident, that could adversely affect our business.

Our internal computer systems, or those used by our CROs or other contractors or consultants, may fail or suffer security breaches.

We utilize and rely on services of third parties to perform services in connection with our clinical trials, which services involve the collection, use, storage and analysis of personal health information. While we receive assurances from these vendors that their services are compliant with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA, and other applicable privacy and cybersecurity laws, there can be no assurance that such third parties will comply with applicable laws or regulations. Non-compliance by such vendors or weaknesses in their information security programs may result in liability for us which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Despite the implementation of security measures, our internal computer systems and those of our current and future clinical research organizations, or CROs, and other contractors and consultants are vulnerable to damage from computer viruses and unauthorized access. While we have not experienced any such material system failure or security breach to date, if such an event were to occur and cause interruptions in our operations, it could result in a material disruption of our development programs and our business operations. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed or future clinical trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. To the extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in a loss of, or damage to, our data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability and the further development and commercialization of our product candidates could be delayed.

If we achieve our near-term product development milestones, we may not be able to manage any subsequent growth.

Should we achieve our near-term product development milestones, of which no assurance can be given, our long-term viability will depend upon the expansion of our operations and the effective management of our growth, which will place a significant strain on our management and on our administrative, operational and financial resources, especially if we expand our business and operations internationally. To manage this growth, we may need to expand our facilities, augment our operational, financial and management systems and hire and train additional qualified personnel. If we are unable to manage our growth effectively, our business would be harmed.

Risks Related to Clinical and Commercialization Activities

Our success depends upon the viability of our product candidates and we cannot be certain any of them will receive regulatory approval to be commercialized.

We will need FDA approval to market and sell any of our product candidates in the United States and approvals from FDA-equivalent regulatory authorities in foreign jurisdictions to commercialize our product candidates in those jurisdictions. In order to obtain FDA approval of any of our product candidates, we must submit to the FDA a new drug application, or NDA, or a biologics license application, or BLA, demonstrating that the product candidate is safe for humans and effective for its intended use. This demonstration requires significant research and animal testing, which are referred to as preclinical studies, as well as human testing, which are referred to as clinical trials. Satisfaction of the FDA’s regulatory requirements typically takes many years, depends upon the type, complexity, and novelty of the product candidate, and requires substantial resources for research, development, testing and manufacturing. We cannot predict whether our research and clinical approaches will result in drugs that the FDA considers safe for humans and effective for indicated uses. The FDA has substantial discretion in the drug approval process and may require us to conduct additional preclinical and clinical testing or to perform post-marketing studies. The approval process may also be delayed by changes in government regulation, future legislation, administrative action or changes in FDA policy that occur prior to or during our regulatory review.

Even if we comply with all FDA requests, the FDA may ultimately reject one or more of our NDAs or BLAs, as applicable. We cannot be sure that we will ever obtain regulatory clearance for our product candidates. Failure to obtain FDA approval of any of our product candidates will reduce our number of potentially salable products, if any, and, therefore, corresponding product revenues, and will have a material and adverse impact on our business.

As the results of earlier preclinical studies or clinical trials are not necessarily predictive of future results, any product candidate we advance into clinical trials may not have favorable results in later clinical trials or receive regulatory approval.

Even if our preclinical studies and clinical trials are completed as planned, we cannot be certain that their results will support the claims of our product candidates. Positive results in preclinical testing and early clinical trials do not ensure that results from later clinical trials will also be positive, and we cannot be sure that the results of later clinical trials will replicate the results of prior clinical trials and preclinical testing.

Our clinical trial process may fail to demonstrate that our product candidates are safe for humans and effective for indicated uses. This failure would cause us to abandon a product candidate and may delay development of other product candidates. Any delay in, or termination of, our clinical trials will delay or cause us to refrain from the filing of our NDAs and/or BLAs with the FDA and, ultimately, our ability to commercialize our product candidates and generate product revenues. In addition, our clinical trials to date involve small patient populations. Because of the small sample size, the results of these clinical trials may not be indicative of future results.

Despite the results reported in earlier clinical trials for our product candidates, we do not know whether any Phase II, Phase III or other clinical trial which we may conduct will demonstrate adequate efficacy and safety to result in regulatory approval to market our product candidates. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical industry, including those with greater resources and experience, have suffered significant setbacks in Phase II or Phase III clinical trials, even after seeing promising results in earlier clinical trials.

Our exosome technologies are based on a novel therapeutic approach which makes it difficult to predict the time and cost of development and of subsequently obtaining regulatory approval, if at all.

Our exosome technologies involve a relatively new therapeutic approach which will face both clinical and regulatory challenges. To date, no products based on exosomes have been approved in the United States or the European Union. It is therefore difficult to accurately predict the developmental challenges we may face for our exosome technologies as they proceed through preclinical studies and clinical trials. In addition, because we have only conducted preclinical studies with our exosome technologies, we have not yet been able to assess their safety in humans, and there may be short-term or long-term effects from treatment with our exosomes that we cannot predict at this time. Also, animal models for the indications we may explore may not exist or may be difficult to obtain for our preclinical studies. As a result of these factors, we are unable to predict the time and cost of development of the exosome technologies and we cannot predict whether the application of the exosome technologies, or any similar or competitive exosome technologies, will result in regulatory approval of any products. There can be no assurance that any development problems we experience in the future related to our exosomes or any of our research programs will not cause significant delays or unanticipated costs, or that such development problems can be solved. Any of these factors may prevent us from completing our preclinical studies or any clinical trials that we may initiate or commercializing any product candidates we may develop on a timely or profitable basis, if at all.

The clinical trial requirements of the FDA, the European Medicines Agency, or EMA, and other regulatory authorities and the criteria these regulators use to determine the safety and efficacy of a product candidate vary substantially according to the type, complexity and intended use and market of the product candidate. As a result, the regulatory approval process for our exosomes is uncertain and may be more expensive and take longer than the approval process for other product candidates. It is difficult to determine how long it will take or how much it will cost to obtain regulatory approvals for our exosomes in either the United States or the European Union or other regions of the world or how long it will take to commercialize our product candidates, if at all. Delay or failure to obtain, or unexpected costs in obtaining, the regulatory approval necessary to bring a potential product candidate to market could decrease our ability to generate sufficient product revenue, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be adversely impacted.

Negative developments in the field of exosomes could damage public perception of any product candidates that we develop, which could adversely affect our ability to conduct our business or obtain regulatory approvals for such product candidates.

Exosome-based vaccines and therapeutics are novel and unproven therapies which may not gain the acceptance of the public, patients or the medical community. To date, efforts by others to leverage natural exosomes have generally demonstrated an inability to generate exosomes with predictable biologically active properties or to manufacture exosomes at suitable scale to treat more than a small number of patients. Our success will depend on our ability to demonstrate that our exosome technologies can overcome these challenges.

Additionally, our success will depend upon physicians who specialize in the treatment of diseases targeted by our exosomes prescribing treatments that involve the use of our product candidates in lieu of, or in addition to, existing treatments with which they are more familiar and for which greater clinical data may be available. Adverse events in clinical trials of our exosomes or in clinical trials of others developing similar products and the resulting publicity, as well as any other adverse events in the field of exosome therapeutics, could result in a decrease in demand for any products that we may develop. These events could also result in the suspension, discontinuation, or clinical hold of, or modification to, our clinical trials. Any future negative developments in the field of exosomes and their use as therapies could also result in greater governmental regulation, stricter labeling requirements and potential regulatory delays in the testing or approvals of our exosomes or other potential future product candidates. Any increased scrutiny could delay or increase the costs of obtaining marketing approval for our exosomes or any other product candidates which we may develop in the future.

Advancing vaccine candidates based on our exosome platform as novel products creates significant challenges for us, including:

	·	obtaining marketing approval, as obtaining an EUA or regulatory approval of such a vaccine candidate from the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities has never been done before;
	·	educating medical personnel regarding the potential efficacy and safety benefits, as well as the challenges, of incorporating our product candidates, if approved, into treatment regimens; and
	·	establishing the sales and marketing capabilities to gain market acceptance, if approved.

We may not be able to file INDs to commence additional clinical trials on the timelines we expect, and even if we are able to do so, the FDA may not permit us to proceed.

We hope to file additional investigational new drug applications, or INDs, over the next several years, including with respect to our exosome technologies in one or more indications. However, the timing of our filing of these INDs is primarily dependent on receiving further data from our preclinical studies and having sufficient processes in place in connection with the manufacturing of the exosomes.

We cannot be sure that submission of an IND will result in the FDA allowing further clinical trials to begin, or that, once begun, issues will not arise that result in the suspension or termination of such clinical trials. Any IND we submit could be denied by the FDA or the FDA could place any future investigation of ours on clinical hold until we provide additional information, either before or after clinical trials are initiated. Additionally, even if such regulatory authorities agree with the design and implementation of the clinical trial set forth in an IND or clinical trial application, we cannot guarantee that such regulatory authorities will not change their requirements in the future. Unfavorable future trial results or other factors, such as insufficient capital to continue development of a product candidate or program, could also cause us to voluntarily withdraw an effective IND.

The Company has limited experience in conducting late-stage clinical trials, which are complex and subject to strict regulatory oversight.

The Company has limited late-stage clinical trial experience with respect to its product candidates. The clinical testing process is governed by stringent regulation and is highly complex, costly, time-consuming, and uncertain as to outcome, and pharmaceutical products and products used in the regeneration of tissue may invite particularly close scrutiny and requirements from the FDA and other regulatory bodies. Our failure or the failure of our collaborators to conduct clinical trials successfully or our failure to capitalize on the results of clinical trials for our product candidates would have a material adverse effect on the Company. If our clinical trials of our product candidates or future product candidates do not sufficiently enroll or produce results necessary to support regulatory approval in the United States or elsewhere, or if they show undesirable side effects, we will be unable to commercialize these product candidates.

To receive regulatory approval for the commercial sale of our product candidates, we must conduct adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate efficacy and safety in humans. Clinical failure can occur at any stage of testing. Our clinical trials may produce negative or inconclusive results, and we may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional clinical and/or non-clinical testing. In addition, the results of our clinical trials may show that our product candidates are ineffective or may cause undesirable side effects, which could interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials, resulting in the denial of regulatory approval by the FDA and other regulatory authorities. Furthermore, negative, delayed or inconclusive results may result in:

	·	the withdrawal of clinical trial participants;
	·	the termination of clinical trial sites or entire trial programs;
	·	costly litigation arising out of the trials;
	·	substantial monetary awards to patients or other claimants;
	·	the requirement that additional trials be conducted;
	·	impairment of our business reputation;
	·	loss of revenues; and
	·	the inability to commercialize our product candidates.

Delays in the commencement, enrollment, and completion of clinical testing could result in increased costs to us and delay or limit our ability to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates.

Delays in the commencement, enrollment or completion of clinical testing could significantly affect our product development costs. The current pandemic has had an impact on the ability to conduct clinical trials due to inabilities to enroll or even get subjects to complete the trials due to lockdowns, reluctance to travel, limitations set by trial sites and other reasons. We cannot predict how long this will exist and while the hospitalization rates and number of cases seem to be on the decline, no assurance it will not revert to prior critical levels. A clinical trial may be suspended or terminated by the Company, the FDA, or other regulatory authorities due to a number of factors. The commencement and completion of clinical trials require us to identify and maintain a sufficient number of trial sites, many of which may already be engaged in other clinical trial programs for the same indication as our product candidates or may otherwise be resource constrained. We may be required to withdraw from a clinical trial as a result of changing standards of care, or we may become ineligible to participate in clinical studies. We do not know whether planned clinical trials will begin on time or be completed on schedule, if at all. The commencement, enrollment and completion of clinical trials can be delayed for a number of reasons, including, but not limited to, delays related to:

	·	findings in preclinical studies;
	·	reaching agreements on acceptable terms with prospective CROs, vendors and trial sites, the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different CROs, vendors and trial sites;

	·	obtaining regulatory clearance to commence a clinical trial;
	·	complying with conditions imposed by a regulatory authority regarding the scope or term of a clinical trial, or being required to conduct additional trials before moving on to the next phase of trials;
	·	obtaining institutional review board, or IRB, approval to conduct a clinical trial at numerous prospective sites;
	·	recruiting and enrolling patients to participate in clinical trials for a variety of reasons, including the size of the patient population, nature of trial protocol, meeting the enrollment criteria for our studies, screening failures, the inability of the sites to conduct trial procedures properly, the inability of the sites to devote their resources to the trial, the availability of approved effective treatments for the relevant disease and competition from other clinical trial programs for similar indications;
	·	the impact of COVID-19 on patient screening and patient enrollment;
	·	developing and validating any companion diagnostic to be used in the trial, to the extent we are required to do so;
	·	patients failing to comply with the clinical trial protocol or dropping out of a trial;
	·	clinical trial sites failing to comply with the clinical trial protocol or dropping out of a trial;
	·	addressing any conflicts with new or existing laws or regulations;
	·	the need to add new clinical trial sites;
	·	retaining patients who have initiated their participation in a clinical trial but may be prone to withdraw due to the treatment protocol, lack of efficacy, personal issues, or side effects from the therapy, or who are lost to further follow-up;
	·	manufacturing sufficient quantities of a product candidate for use in clinical trials on a timely basis;
	·	obtaining advice from regulatory authorities regarding the statistical analysis plan to be used to evaluate the clinical trial data or other trial design issues;
	·	demonstrating the bioequivalence of products we manufacture to prior products manufactured on our behalf;
	·	complying with design protocols of any applicable special protocol assessment we receive from the FDA;
	·	severe or unexpected drug-related side effects experienced by patients in a clinical trial;
	·	collecting, analyzing and reporting final data from the clinical trials;
	·	breaches in quality of manufacturing runs that compromise all or some of the doses made; positive results in FDA-required viral testing; karyotypic abnormalities in our cell product; or contamination in our manufacturing facilities, all of which events would necessitate disposal of all cells made from that source;
	·	availability of materials provided by third parties necessary to manufacture our product candidates;
	·	availability of adequate amounts of acceptable tissue for preparation of master cell banks for our products;
	·	requirements to conduct additional trials and studies, and increased expenses associated with the services of the Company’s CROs and other third parties; and
	·	meeting logistical requirements for the delivery of investigational product.

If we are required to conduct additional clinical trials or other testing of our product candidates beyond those that we currently contemplate, we or our development partners, if any, may be delayed in obtaining, or may not be able to obtain or maintain, clinical or marketing approval for these product candidates. We may not be able to obtain approval for indications that are as broad as intended, or we may be able to obtain approval only for indications that are entirely different from those indications for which we sought approval.

Changes in regulatory requirements and guidance may occur, and we may need to amend clinical trial protocols to reflect these changes with appropriate regulatory authorities. Amendments may require us to resubmit our clinical trial protocols to IRBs for re-examination, which may impact the costs, timing, or successful completion of a clinical trial. If we experience delays in the completion of, or if we terminate, our clinical trials, the commercial prospects for our product candidates will be harmed, and our ability to generate product revenues will be delayed or will not be realized. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of a product candidate. Even if we are able to ultimately commercialize our product candidates, other therapies for the same or similar indications may have been introduced to the market and already established a competitive advantage. Any delays in obtaining regulatory approvals may:

	·	delay commercialization of, and our ability to derive product revenues from, our product candidates;
	·	impose costly procedures on us; or
	·	diminish any competitive advantages that we may otherwise enjoy.

We may experience numerous unforeseen events during, or as a result of, clinical trials that could delay or prevent our ability to receive marketing approval or commercialize our product candidates, including:

	·	we may receive feedback from regulatory authorities that requires us to modify the design of our clinical trials;
	·	clinical trials of our product candidates may produce negative or inconclusive results, and we may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional clinical trials or abandon drug development programs;
	·	the number of patients required for clinical trials of our product candidates may be larger than we anticipate, enrollment in these clinical trials may be slower than we anticipate or participants may drop out of these clinical trials at a higher rate than we anticipate;
	·	our third-party contractors, including our CROs, may fail to comply with regulatory requirements or meet their contractual obligations to us in a timely manner, or at all;
	·	we, our investigators, or any of the overseeing IRBs or ethics committees might decide to suspend or terminate clinical trials of our product candidates for various reasons, including non-compliance with regulatory requirements, a finding that our product candidates have undesirable side effects or other unexpected characteristics, or a finding that the participants are being exposed to unacceptable health risks;
	·	the cost of clinical trials of our product candidates may be greater than we anticipate;
	·	the supply or quality of our product candidates or other materials necessary to conduct clinical trials of our product candidates may be insufficient or inadequate;
	·	regulators may revise the requirements for approving our product candidates, or such requirements may not be as we anticipate; and
	·	any future collaborators that conduct clinical trials may face any of the above issues, and may conduct clinical trials in ways they view as advantageous to them but that are suboptimal for us.

If we are required to conduct additional clinical trials or other testing of our product candidates beyond those that we currently contemplate, if we are unable to successfully complete clinical trials of our product candidates or other testing, if the results of these trials or tests are not positive or are insufficiently positive to support marketing approval, or if there are safety concerns, we may:

	·	incur unplanned costs;
	·	be delayed in obtaining marketing approval for our product candidates or not obtain marketing approval at all;
	·	obtain marketing approval in some countries and not in others;
	·	obtain marketing approval for indications or patient populations that are narrower or more limited in scope than intended or desired;
	·	obtain marketing approval subject to significant use or distribution restrictions or with labeling that includes significant safety warnings, including boxed warnings;
	·	be subject to additional post-marketing testing requirements; or
	·	have the drug removed from the market after obtaining marketing approval.

Our drug development costs will also increase if we experience delays in testing or marketing approvals. We do not know whether clinical trials will begin as planned, will need to be restructured or will be completed on schedule, or at all. Furthermore, we rely on third-party CROs and clinical trial sites to ensure the proper and timely conduct of our clinical trials, and while we have agreements governing their committed activities, we have limited influence over their actual performance. Significant clinical trial delays also could shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates or allow our competitors to bring drugs to market before we do and impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and may harm our business and results of operations.

The outcome of preclinical testing and early clinical trials may not be predictive of the success of later clinical trials, interim results of a clinical trial do not necessarily predict final results, and the results of our clinical trials may not satisfy the requirements of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities.

We currently have no products approved for sale and we cannot guarantee that we will ever have marketable drugs. Clinical failure can occur at any stage of clinical development. Clinical trials may produce negative or inconclusive results, and we or any future collaborators may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional clinical trials or preclinical studies. We will be required to demonstrate with substantial evidence through adequate and well-controlled clinical trials that our product candidates are safe and effective for use in treating specific conditions in order to obtain marketing approvals for their commercial sale. Success in preclinical studies and early-stage clinical trials does not mean that future larger registration clinical trials will be successful because product candidates in later-stage clinical trials may fail to demonstrate safety and efficacy to the satisfaction of the FDA and non-U.S. regulatory authorities despite having progressed through preclinical studies and early-stage clinical trials. Product candidates that have shown promising results in preclinical studies and early-stage clinical trials may still suffer significant setbacks in subsequent registration clinical trials. Additionally, the outcome of preclinical studies and early-stage clinical trials may not be predictive of the success of later-stage clinical trials.

From time to time, we may publish or report interim or preliminary data from our clinical trials, once initiated. Interim or preliminary data from clinical trials that we may conduct may not be indicative of the final results of the trial and 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. Interim or preliminary data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the interim or preliminary data. As a result, interim or preliminary data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available.

In addition, the design of a clinical trial can determine whether its results will support approval of a drug and flaws in the design of a clinical trial may not become apparent until the clinical trial is well advanced. We have limited experience in designing clinical trials and may be unable to design and conduct a clinical trial to support marketing approval. Further, if our product candidates are found to be unsafe or lack efficacy, we will not be able to obtain marketing approval for them and our business would be harmed. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical industry, including those with greater resources and experience than us, have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials, even after obtaining promising results in preclinical studies and earlier clinical trials.

In some instances, there can be significant variability in safety and efficacy results between different clinical trials of the same product candidate due to numerous factors, including changes in trial protocols, differences in size and type of the patient populations, differences in and adherence to the dosing regimen and other trial protocols and the rate of dropout among clinical trial participants. We do not know whether any clinical trials we may conduct will demonstrate consistent or adequate efficacy and safety sufficient to obtain marketing approval to market our product candidates.

In the event that an adverse safety issue, clinical hold or other adverse finding occurs in one or more of our clinical trials, once initiated, such event could adversely affect our other clinical trials using the same product candidate. Moreover, there is a relatively limited safety data set for product candidates using an exosome platform. An adverse safety issue or other adverse finding in a clinical trial conducted by a third party with a product candidate similar to ours could adversely affect our clinical trials.

Further, our product candidates may not be approved even if they achieve their primary endpoints in Phase 3 clinical trials or registration trials. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with our trial design and our interpretation of data from preclinical studies and clinical trials. In addition, any of these regulatory authorities may change requirements for the approval of a product candidate even after reviewing and providing comments or advice on a protocol for a pivotal clinical trial that has the potential to result in approval by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. In addition, any of these regulatory authorities may also approve a product candidate for fewer or more limited indications than we request or may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly post-marketing clinical trials. In addition, the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not approve the labeling claims that we believe would be necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of our product candidates.

Before obtaining marketing approvals for the commercial sale of any product candidate for a target indication, we must demonstrate with substantial evidence gathered in preclinical studies and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials, and, with respect to approval in the United States, to the satisfaction of the FDA and elsewhere to the satisfaction of other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, that the product candidate is safe and effective for use for that target indication. There is no assurance that the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities will consider our future clinical trials to be sufficient to serve as the basis for approval of one of our product candidates for any indication. The FDA and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities retain broad discretion in evaluating the results of our clinical trials and in determining whether the results demonstrate that a product candidate is safe and effective. If we are required to conduct additional clinical trials of a product candidate than we expect prior to its approval, we will need substantial additional funds and there is no assurance that the results of any such additional clinical trials will be sufficient for approval.

The failure to obtain required regulatory clearances or approvals for any companion diagnostic tests that we may pursue may prevent or delay approval of any of our product candidates. Moreover, the commercial success of any of our product candidates that require a companion diagnostic will be tied to the receipt of any required regulatory clearances or approvals and the continued availability of such tests.

In connection with the clinical development of our product candidates for certain indications, we may work with collaborators to develop or obtain access to companion diagnostic tests to identify appropriate patients for our product candidates. We may rely on third parties for the development, testing and manufacturing of these companion diagnostics, the application for and receipt of any required regulatory clearances or approvals, and the commercial supply of these companion diagnostics. The FDA and foreign regulatory authorities regulate companion diagnostics as medical devices that will likely be subject to clinical trials in conjunction with the clinical trials for product candidates, and which will require separate regulatory clearance or approval prior to commercialization. This process could include additional meetings with health authorities, such as a pre-submission meeting and the requirement to submit an investigational device exemption. In the case of a companion diagnostic that is designated as “significant risk device,” approval of an investigational device exemption by the FDA and IRB is required before such diagnostic is used in conjunction with the clinical trials for a corresponding product candidate. We or our third-party collaborators may fail to obtain the required regulatory clearances or approvals, which could prevent or delay approval of our product candidates. In addition, the commercial success of any of our product candidates that require a companion diagnostic will be tied to and dependent upon the receipt of required regulatory clearances or approvals and the continued ability of such third parties to make the companion diagnostic commercially available to us on reasonable terms in the relevant geographies.

If we are required to in the future and if we are unable to successfully develop companion diagnostic tests for our product candidates that require such tests, or experience significant delays in doing so, we may not realize the full commercial potential of these product candidates.

SEC Form 10-K filed by Capricor Therapeutics, Inc.